Terri Schiavo (2 Viewers)

Jul 19, 2003
3,286
#24
I see what you're saying and I agree to some extent, but as I said, her parents are willing to take care of her and her existence or nonexistence will not affect anyone other than her loved ones...so it really shouldn't have gone to court. A court room isn't a place where you decide to kill a perfectly innocent person. Even murderers who receive the death sentence are treated better than Terri. At least they die in peace, not starving to death in agony.
 
Apr 12, 2004
77,164
#25
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
I see what you're saying and I agree to some extent, but as I said, her parents are willing to take care of her and her existence or nonexistence will not affect anyone other than her loved ones...so it really shouldn't have gone to court. A court room isn't a place where you decide to kill a perfectly innocent person. Even murderers who receive the death sentence are treated better than Terri. At least they die in peace, not starving to death in agony.
She is not starving to death, she is being fed intervenously.

But what you say about those on death row is true.

I agree, they should be allowed to take her into their home and care for her, but your house or whatever, as well as you, has to be set up just like a hospital. If one does not have the training to take care of a person like that, then a staff must be provided. The equipment is not made to be used in a domestic residence, but rather in a hospital-like environment.
 

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,260
#26
One thing I'm wondering is... if they've decided to let her die by removing her feeding tube, why not just give her a lethal injection? Sounds brutal, but wouldn't you rather die a quick painless death? I mean they're giving her morphine to "ease the pain"... which is more humane?
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,973
#28
What irritates me most is that our nation has billion-dollar deficit problems, kids dying in Iraq daily, the daily threat of domestic terrorism at our insecure ports, a nation of kids growing more overweight and with more psychological disorders every year, etc., and what are our government leaders obsessing over?

Not that this one person's life is any less important than anyone else's. But shouldn't our elected leaders be focused on bigger, more universal, more pressing issues with our hard-earned tax dollars? :(

Friggin' Floridians. Elian Gonzales, and now this...

I SOOO despise Florida.
 

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,260
#29
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
What irritates me most is that our nation has billion-dollar deficit problems, kids dying in Iraq daily, the daily threat of domestic terrorism at our insecure ports, a nation of kids growing more overweight and with more psychological disorders every year, etc., and what are our government leaders obsessing over?

Not that this one person's life is any less important than anyone else's. But shouldn't our elected leaders be focused on bigger, more universal, more pressing issues with our hard-earned tax dollars? :(

Friggin' Floridians. Elian Gonzales, and now this...

I SOOO despise Florida.
Of course in an ideal world, the elected leaders would focus on broader, 'more important' things (no disrespect to Ms. Schiavo), but let's be honest, a leader's decision-making in this kind of situation and the Elian Gonzales case will be much more widely recognised than their policies on things like childhood obesity, and other such issues that society has become desensitized to. Like it or not, politicians want ratings too.

Burke: we're cool
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
117,014
#31
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
What bugs me is how parents who are ready and willing to take care of their daughter are robbed of that right be some idiot judge who wants to starve a human being to death.
Everbody should watch the show "the Abrams Report" on MSNBC. They were just discussing this very issue, and I concur with Dan Abrams that this is not a case of starving a person to death. This is nothing different than any other medical procedure for that matter.

And don't blame a judge for following the law set before him. :rolleyes:
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
117,014
#32
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
I see what you're saying and I agree to some extent, but as I said, her parents are willing to take care of her and her existence or nonexistence will not affect anyone other than her loved ones...so it really shouldn't have gone to court. A court room isn't a place where you decide to kill a perfectly innocent person. Even murderers who receive the death sentence are treated better than Terri. At least they die in peace, not starving to death in agony.
Again, she's brain dead. She can't feel anything.

And once again, it's not murder. Hell, canines are put to sleep for being terminally ill.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
117,014
#33
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
What irritates me most is that our nation has billion-dollar deficit problems, kids dying in Iraq daily, the daily threat of domestic terrorism at our insecure ports, a nation of kids growing more overweight and with more psychological disorders every year, etc., and what are our government leaders obsessing over?

Not that this one person's life is any less important than anyone else's. But shouldn't our elected leaders be focused on bigger, more universal, more pressing issues with our hard-earned tax dollars? :(

Friggin' Floridians. Elian Gonzales, and now this...

I SOOO despise Florida.
Seriously. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Let the woman die in peace and dignity.
 
Jul 19, 2003
3,286
#34
Canines? That's supposed to be comparable?

Why does it bug you whether she lives or dies? It should be no one's business but her family's. I can't believe people are overlooking the question of whose right it is to kill or let live...it is no one but the Creator's.



Regardless of whether she's brain dead or not, responds to stimuli or not.....regardless of anything discussed on here. I can't see it being anyone but her family's right to decide on this. Why a judge has to butt in and take someone's life is beyond me.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,973
#35
This may be controversial, but I would argue that a typical canine is more of a sentient being than Terri Schiavo has been in the past 10 years.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
117,014
#37
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
This may be controversial, but I would argue that a typical canine is more of a sentient being than Terri Schiavo has been in the past 10 years.
Agreed. That's why I brought up the issue.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
117,014
#38
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
Why does it bug you whether she lives or dies? It should be no one's business but her family's. I can't believe people are overlooking the question of whose right it is to kill or let live...it is no one but the Creator's.
Exactly right. Who are we to stop her from returning to her creator by making her live under these conditions and making her "live" in nothingness just for the pleasure of her own family? Who are we to stop her from "going to her promised land?" It's not murder, so stop calling it that. She has been "dead" for over 10 years and people are just obstructing her path of returning to her creator in paradise. Would you want to be stopped from moving on to a better place?
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,973
#39
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
Why a judge has to butt in and take someone's life is beyond me.
I think we've become so jaded to medical miracles that we often see them as an extention of our own rights of life.

We're shaving hairs here, but what is the more active, contrived, deliberate action: keeping someone on a life support system for many years or by pulling their feeding tube? It's a gray area. (No pun intended, Graham.)

Given the expectation of medical science as an extension of ourselves, I'm reminded of the ultra-religious Christians in this country who cannot have children and therefore undergo fertility treatments. Suddenly, they are carrying sextuplets as one of the complications of these treatments. (An older mom with twins? you can bet fertility treatments were involved...).

Doctors then advise that only a few of the 6 fetuses in such a massive birth might survive, and that it would improve their chances of survival if some of the others are 'aborted'. Then the Christian parents respond, "But it is God's will that they all should be born!" ... forgetting that "God's will" was that they were infertile to begin with. The rest was science. Yep, that round earth, we aren't the center of the universe, evolution-lovin' devil talk known as science...
 

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,260
#40
++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
Exactly right. Who are we to stop her from returning to her creator by making her live under these conditions and making her "live" in nothingness just for the pleasure of her own family? Who are we to stop her from "going to her promised land?" It's not murder, so stop calling it that. She has been "dead" for over 10 years and people are just obstructing her path of returning to her creator in paradise. Would you want to be stopped from moving on to a better place?
++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
Doctors then advise that only a few of the 6 fetuses in such a massive birth might survive, and that it would improve their chances of survival if some of the others are 'aborted'. Then the Christian parents respond, "But it is God's will that they all should be born!" ... forgetting that "God's will" was that they were infertile to begin with. The rest was science. Yep, that round earth, we aren't the center of the universe, evolution-lovin' devil talk known as science...
I'm not touching this one with a ten foot pole
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)