[SolomoninSouthDakota]

In a way yes and no. Honestly, we can't sort it all out here, but there are very many distinctions to be made in "these cases". People easily talk right past each other if some terms aren't defined etc. Terri, is especially deserving defense because of suspicious motives and evidence. Now often feeding tubes are disconnected I understand when some other factor is taking the life of a patient anyway. And that is ok. But with Terri that is not the case. On the other hand it is hugely symbolic to the general public and the MSM that, to no one's surprise, brings everything down to the most simplistic level.

[jpsb]

'brings everything down to the most simplistic level."

Yes, that if you are going to fight in the realm of public opinoun you absolutely have to do. Complicate the issue and you lose all momentun in your direction. And in Terry case we (pro-life) need to generate momentum and fast so we must keep it simple.

[BonnieJ]

My opposition is to the MEANS. We starve people to death as euthanasia in this country. That does not strike you as being barbaric, even with other circumstances vary? You're right, maybe we can't "dialogue". Is your first preference always to insinuate that others lack "understanding"? That makes me question YOUR depth.

[BonnieJ]

Excuse me...even WHEN other circumstances vary. It is late and I'm leaving for Europe in a few hours, and the tone here is disheartening lately.