Zogby Poll: Americans Not in Favor of Starving Terri Schiavo (poll with fair questions)

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Polls leading up to the death of Terri Schiavo made it appear Americans had formed a consensus in favor of ending her life. However, a new Zogby poll with fairer questions shows the nation clearly supporting Terri and her parents and wanting to protect the lives of other disabled patients.

The Zogby poll found that, if a person becomes incapacitated and has not expressed their preference for medical treatment, as in Terri's case, 43 percent say "the law presume that the person wants to live, even if the person is receiving food and water through a tube" while just 30 percent disagree.

"If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water," the poll asked.

A whopping 79 percent said the patient should not have food and water taken away while just 9 percent said yes.

"From the very start of this debate, Americans have sat on one of two sides," Concerned Women for America's Lanier Swann said in response to the poll. One side "believes Terri's life has worth and purpose, and the side who saw Michael Schiavo's actions as merciful, and appropriate."

More than three-fourths of Americans agreed, Swann said, "because a person is disabled, that patient should never be denied food and water."

The poll also lent support to members of Congress to who passed legislation seeking to prevent Terri's starvation death and help her parents take their lawsuit to federal courts.

"When there is conflicting evidence on whether or not a patient would want to be on a feeding tube, should elected officials order that a feeding tube be removed or should they order that it remain in place," respondents were asked.

Some 18 percent said the feeding tube should be removed and 42 percent said it should remain in place.

Swann said her group would encourage Congress to adopt legislation that would federal courts to review cases when the medical treatment desire of individuals is not known and the patient's family has a dispute over the care.

"According to these poll results, many Americans do in fact agree with what we're trying to accomplish," she said.

The poll found that 49 percent of Americans believe there should be exceptions to the right of a spouse to act as a guardian for an incapacitated spouse. Only 39 percent disagreed.

When asked directly about Terri's case and told the her estranged husband Michael "has had a girlfriend for 10 years and has two children with her" 56 percent of Americans believed guardianship should have been turned over to Terri's parents while 37 percent disagreed.

Perhaps, you should learn about this disability-state that you have decided makes people killable? Just a suggestion.

Absurd.

Perhaps you should go back and read what I actually said instead of assigning me those positions you feel most comfortable attacking.

Just a suggestion.

"And you degrade yourself with shameful statements like the "pro-killing faction"."

It is merely a factual statement. The faction, that you represent, was in favor of killing Terri Schiavo. What the hell should I call it?

I NEVER said I was "in favor of killing Terri Schiavo".

IN FACT I said that if it was up to me I could NOT have made the decision to remove her feeding tube.
I would have prefered to transfer custody to the parents.

HOWEVER I don't know how I would have felt after seeing a loved one trapped in this state for 15 years and I am not ready to condemn the husband.
And for all I know he WAS carrying out Terri's final wishes.

You need to actually read posts and comprehend what people's positions ARE before making accusations.

Perhaps you should go back and read what I actually said instead of assigning me those positions you feel most comfortable attacking.

You said that a PVS patient could "suffer". That it was absurd to say a PVS patient couldn't "suffer". That is what you said. If you are backing away from that now, I don't blame you.

I NEVER said I was "in favor of killing Terri Schiavo".

No, you simply vigorously spent dozens of posts defending the decision to kill her.

I am not ready to condemn the husband.

Ok. Fair enough. Meanwhile, I am. I condemn him as the creepy, cruel, ghoulish pr*ck that he is. So, you've stated your opinion & I've stated mine.

Anything else?

You really need to attempt to format your posts so that readers can tell the difference between the comments you are responding to and your own statements.
The way you post, everything just runs together in one big incoherant mess.
Just a suggestion.
Yes well, most of the incoherant mess is what you posted!
Everybody knows that I am pro life, not for killing mentally deprived persons. Not for leaving them to starve and thirst to death, which the likes of you seem to approve of.

700 posted on 04/04/2005 10:05:16 PM EDT by Jorge

...and debating the hoi polloi has lost whatever attraction...

Ann Coulter would correct you (as she corrected a NY Times writer--her correction is seen in the special features on the DVD " Is it true what they say about Ann?")

She would argue that your phrase the hoi polloi is a bit redundant since "hoi" is the definite article for "polloi". That is, "hoi" already means "the". So you can simply refer to "hoi polloi".

Then, again, no big deal. It could be viewed as idiomatic, so maybe it should be given a pass.

But i WILL ask you to keep your word that your post #667 is "an opus"---YOUR opus.

Looks like nearly all the OPUS-OUT crowd of late are folks that always eschewed "Conservatism's Dark Side"...lol...as they put it.

They are nearly all social libs or moderates....which is their choice.

I think the TS affair which thankfully missed pushed them in a direction they've always wanted to go rather than being an epiphany.

Go back and read what you posted to me.

My quote and your response to it appear as a single statement in one paragraph, with nothing separating them.

Your posts are almost unintelligible as a result.
Are you doing this on purpose?

If you don't know how to format posts, all you have to do is look at how other Freepers do it and copy them.

You said that a PVS patient could "suffer". That it was absurd to say a PVS patient couldn't "suffer". That is what you said. If you are backing away from that now, I don't blame you.

Nice try but I'm not backing away from my previous statement one bit.

Even if the medical community consensus is that a PVS patient can't suffer, I believe this is in a limited context.

Yes, maybe a PVS patient won't feel or respond to normal pain stimuli, but they remained trapped in that body.

I believe a person has a soul and is in there, aware on levels we know nothing about, and yes COULD and probably DOES suffer in some manner.

Even if the medical community consensus is that a PVS patient can't suffer, I believe.... a person has a soul and is in there, aware on levels we know nothing about, and yes COULD and probably DOES suffer in some manner.

Amazing. So in other words, forget the actual scientific basis for the entire case, you supported ending her life partially because your personal metaphysical theories told you that she "COULD and probably DOES suffer", based on zero evidence or accepted scientific fact whatsoever.

Remind me again which side contains the religious zealots?

If you actually believe what you are saying here, then in fact you are not taking the legal basis for killing Terri Schiavo seriously. You have invented your own basis for killing a person and it is based entirely on pie in the sky metaphysics.

Again, it's fine and dandy for you to believe these things personally, but when the ramifications are the death of an innocent person, one would hope you would examine the beliefs more seriously and apply them in a more sober way. When you make it plain that you are ok with killing people because of some unprovable metaphysical stuff you "believe", don't be surprised when others get alarmed and disturbed and call you on it. They are right to do so.

The results of this poll are not significant. The MSM succeeded in convincing a majority of the American people that Terri was effectively in a coma. There is no changing that fact. What people think should be done if.... doesn't matter a hoot. The majority still believe that pulling the tube was the right thing to do and the Republicans should not have interfered.

The MSM isn't dead yet. They scored a big one here. While we were spending our energy trying to save Terri, they were spending theirs convincing the world that she was brain dead. As a result, they have Frist and 55 (count 'em) pathetic Republican Senators on the run. They are tasting blood. Watch out.

So in other words, forget the actual scientific basis for the entire case, you supported ending her life partially because your personal metaphysical theories told you that she "COULD and probably DOES suffer", based on zero evidence or accepted scientific fact whatsoever.

Where did I say I supported ending her life?

I said that I probably could not have removed her feeding tube, but didn't know how I would feel after seeing her in this state for 15 years.

AND I do understand the right to personal end of life decisions such as this, and am not willing to judge the husband.

Remind me again which side contains the religious zealots?

All I said is that I believe God created people as living SOULS and that they continue to exist as such, EVEN as a PVS patient.

You call that being a "zealot"?

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you even read posts before you pound out these responses?

I know full well that I'm going to be flamed for this, but I learned long ago that I am driven to do what is morally right regardless of the opinions of others concerning my actions.

First, a little about myself: When I made the fundamental ideological choices which led me to choose the Republican party, we still had troops in 'Nam. Nixon was still in office, gasoline cost $0.33 a gallon, and most Americans had never heard the words "Watergate" or "OPEC", and I was one of the vanishingly small number of fundamentalist Christians NOT voting for Democrats. The GOP has changed a lot in thirty years, and not all of that change has been for the better.

Concerning the polls surrounding the Schiavo case: contrary to several thousand posts on this blog alone, the vast majority of liberals never "wanted Mrs. Schiavo dead". The vast majority of AMERICANS, from either side of the aisle, felt overwhelmingly that it was NONE OF THEIR DARNED BUSINESS! And they felt even more strongly that it was singularly NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE US CONGRESS.

All of the earlier polls asked variations on: "Should Congress be involved?" To which, much to the chagrin of the religious zealots who have perverted my beloved party into the Big Government-loving monster it is today, the VAST majority of Americans responded resoundingly "NO!" Whether they personally sided with the husband or the parents was not the issue - NO ONE with any sense wants Congress involved in such a deeply personal issue. And, in MY opinion, anyone who feels otherwise has NO business claiming to belong to the party which has always believed in minimal federal interference in personal affairs. (And now, let the invective begin .....)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.