[Deo volente]

You should read YOUR own post before responding to mine.


From your post:
"If she is able to feed herself, and wants to, she's perfectly allowed to do so. The fact is, though, that she's not going to do it."


So, logically, it follows from your argument that since babies are NOT able to feed themselves, they should suffer the same fate as Terri, who is ALSO not
able to feed herself at this time.

[Gondring]

So, logically, it follows from your argument that since babies are NOT able to feed themselves, they should suffer the same fate as Terri, who is ALSO not able to feed herself at this time.

No... logically what follows is that this whole line of discussion is irrelevant to the question to which I responded (since you're evidently incapable of following a thread back, I hotlinked them). The original point was questioning whether Mrs. Schiavo would be denied, were she to get up out of bed...presumably able to eat on her own without the tube:

I was wondering today if the Lord healed Terri(all things possible) and she got up and walked out if she would be told she had to die and forced back in bed.

Now do you understand the ridiculousness of your comments?

As for a baby, well, a baby has never been an adult who could have expressed wishes not to be hooked to a tube, and therefore would not be in the situation. It's a red herring...a strawman set up to distract from the real points being made.