Terri Schiavo, R.I.P.
I’m forced (in this case, the term seems more apt than usual) to wonder if Terri Schiavo’s death this morning means there will be no more entries added to the darkly funny (albeit horrible) Terri Schiavo’s blog.
(Thanks — I think — to valued lies.com contributor Sven for the latter link.)
On a more serious note, I’m also forced to wonder if the public aftertaste from this will, in fact, benefit Bush and the rest of the Culture of Life panderers. The fact that they “lost,” on the surface, doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t benefit politically. This may well have been a no-lose scenario from the get-go for them, just as it was a no-win scenario for those who actually cared about Terri Schiavo’s welfare.
Anyway, clean up the elephant poop and bring on the next act. This part of the circus is over.
March 31st, 2005 at 2:16 pm
I’m not sure I want credit for the Terri Shiavo blog, but thanks anyways. In my defense, I forwarded it to you before getting the news of her passing — not that that makes it any less horrible.
R.I.P.
March 31st, 2005 at 2:59 pm
Michael Schiavo’s question, “When is the bitch goin to die?“, finally has an answer. Of course, he enacted the final act of “exercizing her wishes”, not allowing her parents to be with her until after her death. That’ll teach them to be caring, intrusive parents. Sorry for the sarcasm, but this is a hateful, mean, cruel SOB.
Her family, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Using a passage from Scripture….Tsk, tsk. Damn them, anyway.
I think I’ll explode the next time I hear Michael’s supporters dare to even mention the word torture.
March 31st, 2005 at 4:48 pm
What makes him such a cruel, hateful, SOB? The fact that he was doing what she wished? Do you claim that she wanted to do so otherwise?
In the end, justice wins. Its how it was supposed to be.
March 31st, 2005 at 8:57 pm
I don’t think honoring his wife’s last wish makes him a cruel, SOB at all.
I admire him for standing for his wife in the face of unprecendented intervention by a whole country who really has no business sticking their noses in their lives.
Teachervet and others, if you’re so concerned about preserving life, maybe you should focus your efforts on real crises, like Iraq or legalized assault weapons.
April 1st, 2005 at 3:13 am
Michael Schiavo’s question, “When is the bitch goin to die?“
that old chestnut. i tend to wonder if the right-wingers and pro-lifers who pimp this nugget around actually have any proof, or just the word of a hospice nurse who is very plainly a pro-lifer out to make michael schiavo look bad (quite a shame he’ll probably never be able to sue any of the scumbags who are gleefully repeating pure rumors, if not outright lies, about him).
April 1st, 2005 at 4:37 am
There is such a thing as having a point, but losing the argument because you’re a jackass. I think this “Terry Schiavo’s Blog,” falls somewhere within the realm of this axiom.
April 1st, 2005 at 5:03 am
If there is a public aftertaste that benefits Bush and company, crap like “Terry Schiavo’s Blog” will certainly contribute to it.
…and who was it, outside of a few people with close, personal connections to this case, who actually cared about Terry Schivo’s well-being? You? Me? The idiot who wasted his time building the “Terry Schiavo Blog? ” Who cared more, the nuts who wanted to keep her corpse warm and call her living or the assholes who placed a guard on the door so her own mother couldn’t give her ice? Maybe it’s the right wing types, who will exploit this to avance their religious agenda or – no wait – I’ll bet it’s the left wing types who will suddenly become all mushy and sympathetic once they figure out how to use Terry Schiavo as some indictment of the Bush healthcare system. I’m waiting for the Right to Die/Assisted Suicide bunch to weigh in soon, on some level – they must be eaten up with concern for poor Terry, and how much needless pain could have been avoided had she been put to sleep medically. The sincere compassion everyone has exhibited, and will continue to exhibit is truely heartwarming.
April 1st, 2005 at 3:25 pm
What do “any-wingers” have to do with killing a healthy woman? I keep reading that the issue was politicized by right-wingers, but every accusation is accompanied by blatant attempts to politicize it by left-wingers. The issue is human rights, and all “wingers” profess to support such efforts.
This has never been a political issue, but since so many of you insist on making it one….it appears that the entire issue has been used as a tool to attack an administration that many of you hate – and killing a healthy woman is worth the sacrifice if it serves the purpose.
Politicize this: If someone kills a member of the Schiavo family or their disengenuous attorney, I will feel little remorse – they continue to attack a family that has only endorsed forgiveness. If someone kidnaps one of the aforementioned emotion-dead people and starves/dehydrates them to death, who could deny their vengeful act of mercy? Euphoric ethnic cleansing?
Michael Schiavo barred Terri’s family from her bedside in her dying moments. The Schindlers won’t be allowed at the burial site. The autopsy is mandated by Florida law as a result of Michael’s cremation decision, so he abruptly and conveniently “changed his mind,” falsely insisting that the autopsy was his “new” decision. After “winning,” the Schiavo family members continue their attack on the grieving family, using the lawyer who collected her rehabilitation money as their primary spokesman.
Every action by the Schiavos since her death provides additional evidence of Michael’s hatred and cruelty, further justification of the charge that he is a hate-filled, cruel SOB. Defend him, but on what grounds?
A disabled woman was killed because a judge chose to believe the hearsay of an unfaithful husband. Having done so, his decision became “fact.” The executive and legislative branches passed a law requiring the judicial branch to impose a check on itself, but the judiciary ignored that law. The battle is only in the primary stages, and I hope the U.S. Constitution is the ultimate winner.
April 1st, 2005 at 3:31 pm
TeacherVet, I think you should give yourself a break from the right-wing hate media. They’re messing with your mind.
April 1st, 2005 at 4:48 pm
While discussions of “killing a healthy woman” might have some interest, I can’t see that they’re germane to this discussion. Something completely lacking a cerebral cortex generally can’t be described as healthy, and certainly isn’t a woman.
April 1st, 2005 at 5:25 pm
See, now I’m pissed again and writing here. There must be some correlation. And largely for the same reason I was critical of the POW deaths post, sounds like someone is only interested in the facts that support a pre-existing point of view.
TeacherVet, in a previous post you mentioned that you ‘knew’ Michael Schiavo was guilty of harming Terry based on ‘common sense’ What if common sense tells me that there is no God or no Easter Bunny, or that I should eat more bacon and drink less water? Maybe ‘common sense’ isn’t the best guide for all decisions, its a horrible trap many of us fall victim to, especially in areas where we have a bias or lack the specialized information necessary for accurate evaluation.
First off, she’s not healthy. She’s got brain damage, to what extent we’re still waiting to find out, but she’s not healthy at least as the dictionary is defining it: “the absence of disease, weakness, or malfunction.” Second, and forgive me as I am a crude man who uses crude langauge, but your facts are completely fucked up. Michael didn’t bar them from her bedside as she lay dying because he wished to inflict one final cruelty, that incident was the result of her brother fighting with a police officer about wanting to be let in after the family had been with her for 9 hours and Michael requested some private time with her. Thirdly, how is he such a bad guy, he went and earned a nursing degree in order to take care of her and spent 7 years attempt to rehabilitate her, only then deciding that she was beyond hope. All this talk of infidelity is kind of odd to me. I know ’till death do us part’ and thats one of the major points of contention, but what kind of wife is she in the state she’s in, completely incapable of any response? Shes not the woman he married. Fourth, lawyers cost money? How ’bout that. What about all the money he promised to charity, not important? So hate filled SOB, I just don’t see it, common sense tells me that you’re selectively filtering facts to support a personal bias.
The hearsay of an unfaithful husband or the hearsay of some unreliable witnesses? It seems to me like if you have a problem with the testimony of secondhand sources then you’d have a problem with everyone’s stories. Also the courts did do exactly what Congress asked of them, its just that the certain members of Congress, like my hero Capt. Ethics Violation himsef, Tom Delay, didn’t like the result and the seperation of powers insured that there was no verdict tampering, so I’m going to go ahead and declare a victory for the Consitution.
Much like TeacherVet, I’m getting all this from watching Fox News and MSNBC, but I will post a link. This guy seems to be interested in the facts and this is what I used for my ’10 second fact check’
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html#timeline
April 1st, 2005 at 11:11 pm
J.A.Y.S.O.N.
I have never stated that I “knew” any such thing; I identified reasons for some strong “suspicions.”
Common Sense: I’m using the term as a shorter version of “logical reasoning,” which I believe to be the best guide in all decision-making.
Healthy: Perhaps not the best word I could have used to state that she was not dying.
Rehabilitation: All such efforts ended in 1992, soon after he received a million-dollar+ settlement, $700,000 of which was intended for her rehab treatments.
Infidelity: The court transcript shows that Michael promised, under oath, to stay with her forever. For him, “forever” only lasted a few months.
Lawyers certainly do cost money. His portion of the settlement, $300,000, should have been his limit of the total funds to be used for legal fees, without using any of Terri’s money; those funds were stipulated for her rehab efforts, as acknowledged by him (according to the transcript).
How much money has this great guy actually donated to charity? According to his lawyer, George Felos, almost all of the total settlement money was used for legal expenses.
Hearsay? It seems that everyone, on both sides, is using selective bias in accepting hearsay testimony.
Congress asked for a full review of the case. When did the courts comply, or did “refusal to review” constitute compliance?
April 1st, 2005 at 11:20 pm
On September 27, 1999, under oath, Michael Schiavo was asked “Have you considered turning the guardianship over to Robert and Many Schindler?”
His response: “No, I have not.”
Asked why not, he said “Basically, I don’t want to do it.”
Pressed to answer more fully: “Because they put me through pretty much hell the last few years. Just their attitude towards me because of the litigations. There is no other reason. I’m Terri’s husband and I will remain guardian.”
Everything he has done is “for Terri?” I continue to believe that he is driven by hatred and revenge, based on his words and actions.
Shortly after saying that his determination to end Terri’s life was about her wishes, Schiavo changed his story in a recent Larry King interview. Asked if he understood her family’s feelings, he said: “Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it’s about Terri. And I’ve also said that in court. We didn’t know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want.” Did he purjure himself in court?
April 1st, 2005 at 11:55 pm
Dr. Peter Morin, a researcher specializing in degenerative brain diseases, with degrees in biochemistry from Boston University, says that MRI and PET scans are standard in diagnosing the extent of brain injuries. When told that Michael had never allowed either test, his response was, “That’s criminal.” He asked “How can he continue as guardian? In a life or death decision, there’s been no MRI or PET?” His conclusion: “These people [Michael Schiavo, George Felos, and Judge Greer] don’t want the information.” He concludes that they already had the diagnosis they wanted.
According to Dr. Morin, a CT scan is a much less expensive test than an MRI, and it “gives only one-tenth of the information that an MRI does.” A CT is useful in an emergency-room setting, but if the question is ischemic injury (brain damage caused by lack of blood or oxygen to the brain) you want an MRI or PET. For subsequent evaluation of brain injury, the CT is pretty useless unless there has been a massive stroke.
George Felos argued that an MRI can’t be done because of thamalic implants that were placed in Terri’s brain in 1992, but ignored the fact that the implants could have been removed. In fact, the doctor who put them in instructed Michael to have them removed. Michael never did so.
Schiavo, Felos, and Judge Greer didn’t choose to admit any information that would upset the diagnosis they already had. It seems that they were fearful of any additional, more precise, and more conclusive information.
The whole history of Terri’s case can be summed up easily: Those who valued Terri’s life spent years trying to introduce additional information before the courts, while the Schiavo/Felos/Greer efforts have consisted entirely of preventing any new information from being presented or considered. The legal system’s willful blindness succeeded, and Terri Schiavo lost.
The error rate in diagnosing PVS is accepted in the medical community as being about 43 per cent. I suspect that it is even higher when the doctor making the diagnosis (Dr. Cranford, in this case) spends a total of 42 minutes with the woman, using only a set of keys as his only medical tools. He was hired by the court to make the diagnosis. Cranford was forced to make those admissions in an interview on MSNBC, then called all doctors who disagreed with him “fakes.” Some of those “fakes” reached their diagnoses after spending many hours working with Terri, although they were not allowed to use MRI or PET scans.
Does anyone honestly relish the notion of civil lawsuits in the aftermath of this travesty? Consider the evidence of neglect by Schiavo/Felos/Greer in not allowing the standard tests which would yield more than minimal information – in a death decision.
John, which right-wing hate media should I avoid?
April 2nd, 2005 at 4:28 am
Media that you’re not willing to post attributions for, I guess.
Many of these latest assertions are near-verbatim restatements from a National Review Online article by Catholic priest Robert Johansen. As I read the account of Johansen’s discussion with Morin, Morin didn’t have the information about the implants when he reportedly made the “that’s criminal” comment about the lack of an MRI. The comment attributed to him subsequently (“He refused a non-invasive test?”) would seem to indicate ignorance about the implants — since the requirement that they be surgically removed prior to the MRI would make the test an invasive procedure, right?
So it sounds like Morin offered this opinion based on an incomplete set of facts provided to him by Johansen. That’s not the same thing as a medical diagnosis. If Morin were to make a diagnosis based on incomplete facts, it would be the same sort of medical-ethics breach that Sen. Frist got into hot water over with his making comments about Terri’s medical condition based on viewing a heavily edited videotape.
I note that we’ve only got Johansen’s version of this conversation. I wonder if Morin would stand by the views attributed to him. If I saw an op-ed article by him (Morin) reiterating those views, I’d be more impressed. I have the same reaction when Johansen talks about the doctor who put the implants in Terri, and who allegedly instructed Michael to remove them, which Michael allegedly refused to do. Who is this doctor? What would he say to the way Johansen is characterizing him here? Why isn’t he quoted, or even named, in the article?
You write, “The error rate in diagnosing PVS is accepted in the medical community as being about 43 per cent.” That’s a stronger version of what Johansen says: “A 1996 British Medical Journal study, conducted at England’s Royal Hospital for Neurodisability, concluded that there was a 43-percent error rate in the diagnosis of PVS.” The study was Misdiagnosis of the vegetative state: retrospective study in a rehabilitation unit. As I read that abstract, I have a hard time accepting that that study is specifically relevant to Terri Schiavo’s case in particular, or Terri-like PVS diagnoses generally.
See, this is why we have a court system: to decide tough questions like this in a refereed environment, where each side gets to make its best case, rules of evidence apply, and appeals can be made to correct mistakes. If things are really as Johansen describes, why have the courts ruled as they have?
Your position seems to be that there have been all kinds of really flagrant errors of judgement, or that self-interested lies on Michael Schiavo’s part have somehow corrupted the judicial process. But if that’s so, then it’s not just the Florida trial judge, George Greer, who’s guilty of it. It’s the Florida appeals court, which has repeatedly affirmed Greer’s rulings. It’s the Florida State Supreme Court, which has repeatedly denied review of those appellate decisions. It’s the federal district judge, James Whittemore, the federal appeals court, and the US Supreme Court, all of which have affirmed, or declined to review, the legal decisions in this case.
It’s not clear to me whether you’re alleging pervasive judicial incompetence or a criminal judicial conspiracy. Either way, I think you need to explain how it is that so many judges appointed mostly by Republicans turned out so bad. And if you think the courts are that awful, how can you support the death penalty? A judiciary as dysfunctional as you describe could never be trusted with life-or-death decisions. Clearly, we must outlaw capital punishment immediately. Can I get your signature on my petition?
Seriously, this is what courts are for. The system is designed to insulate judges from political pressures for this exact situation. In this case, politicians see that they can enhance their own power by pretending to hold the same beliefs held by ill-informed, ideologically biased constituents. Once the politicians have committed to such a position, they have an incentive to push it in the marketplace of ideas, suppressing the truth, whipping up anger based on a false-to-fact version of reality. That way lies demagoguery.
The courts are meant to provide a defense against that sort of thing, and as far as I can tell that’s exactly what they’ve done in this case.
April 2nd, 2005 at 1:35 pm
TeacherVet you make me laugh sometimes.
“This has never been a political issue”.
Um, I think when the President of the United Sates of America and his Congress got involved it became a politcal issue.
April 2nd, 2005 at 7:56 pm
Teacher Vet:
Long time no talk, nice to see you here and about…For the First time, I agree with you 100%. It is inhumane and barbaric the way they do it on an innocent human being, damaged or not, it does not matter. It represents Life. I can see the inconsistencies within the Judical System and Micheal Schivao himself. He even contradict himself and his Lawyer Felos too.
If it was the POW, being with held from Food and Water, we would be outraged too. Imagine a POW, being disabled because they beat him up and pulled his feeding tube out of his Stomach, starved him to death, does that make it alright? That is what most people do to Animals, starve them to death. If we did this to Animals, we would be thrown to Jail, but not for starving a Human Being. It is no wonder and never cease to surprise me that all the People agree with Death, not Life. It is all about choosing of Life or Death. They agreed because she/he was disabled, or brain damaged. What if she isn’t? Did you know in 1992, they left in the Electrodes Implant in Terri, and Micheal refused to have it operated out, causes Paralysis, Pressure and Infection in her Brain which led to have a Brain Damage, Cognitive Speech Impairment, and immobility. If they took out the Electrodes Implant, she would not be brain damaged or in PVS as they claimed. Do not forget she was “fine” before 1992, which in fact AFTER One Month of Collapse in her Home, she was seen in a Wheel chair, able to talk, and move her head perfectly fine, then all of a sudden she was brain damaged? Do you know why Micheal had the Malpratice Medical Suit against them for? The Medical Trust was awarded to Terri by the Jury in 1992 in the tune of $1.2 Million Dollars and Micheal clearly told witnesses that he does not know of Terri’s Wishes, but all of a sudden, he got a recollection yes, to the fact he knows of her Wishes? Micheal NEVER spent the Million Dollars for Treatment, Operation to have the Electrodes taken out as claimed by the Doctor, which caused an Infection and pressure and caused Hydropaelus which causes Paralysis and Brain Damage. Never spent a Cent on Rehabiliation Therapy, Medicines, or whatever. Micheal spent $400,000 out of that Medical Trust to his Lawyer Felos, and his Assistant Lawyer gets about $10,000 or something like that. There was about $40,000 that is supposedly going to Micheal from that Medical Trust after Terri’s Death. So that is motivation. Then Micheal contradicted himself on Larry King Live in 2003 that he does not know what Terri’s wish were but about what he wants for his Family. Let’s not forget that also Micheal claims that Terri was Bulimic during the Collapse in 1990, which caused her Heart Stoppage, but they have seen the Blood Test that she had Low Potassium Levels but her Blood Gases were perfectly fine. The Bone Scan shows in 1991 that Terri has broken bones all over and her neck too which her Parents thinks it is due to the Collapse in 1990, being pushed over by Micheal (Wife Abuse). Also Terri’s Best Friends claimed that Terri told them that she is seeking the Divorce from Micheal BEFORE the Collapse but did not see any Bulimic episodes from Terri, because she was eating Fine and never made a frequent trips to the Toilets during their Visits. The fact Micheal is doing the whole thing is all about Control and his Ego, controlling Terri, does not want a Divorce, but wants her Money. Well He’s got the Money. There should be Fraud Charges against Micheal for misusing the Medical Trust for Terri, where she was already on Medcaid and Medicad paid for the Hospice Fees, not the Medical Trust. Does that sounds suspicious to you? Anyways, Micheal already had a Girlfriend on the side and already had two children and claims Guardianship to Terri should be questioned. People around the World seems to view this as Life and Death’s Choices. We choose Life, as it is of value. People choose Death because they think it is the right thing to do and has no vision of the Future whatsover. I am saddened to know that People don’t really care about Life. Breathing or not, would not care less. Terri was not sick, has no Terminal Illness whatoever, such as Cancer, she is breathing on her own, and moving with some mobility and speaks rare. If the question belies, that if her Electrodes Implant were taken out, she would have been perfectly “fine” and out there walking about with the help of Rehabiliation Therapy, we would not be discussing this if that was the case. It reminds me of a Magician where he has a body in the Box, and would split with a Metal Board and she would be in Two’s, then putting it back together and she is like back whole body. It is very much like her Brain, once we take out and put things back together, everything will become whole. Final Opinion, I just think this is reprehensible, and barbaric to do to a Human Innocent Being. It could have been you or Me. I say DON’T PUll the Plug, I need that Food and Water in order to Live. If they don’t want to Live, then they Die. There is no going back and that’s the end of it. Disabled and Brain Damaged People has the right to die of Natural Causes.
April 2nd, 2005 at 8:22 pm
Something I have been wondering though was the fact that Terri asked for the Divorce before her Collapse in 1990, then her Bone Scan showed broken bones after One Month. Then the Medical Trust of $1.2 Million Dollars for Terri in 1992 which Micheal misused and used for himself and his Lawyers. No Rehabiliation or Therapy used with this Money in 10 years. Spent in Hospice for 5 years saying she was Terminally Ill, which she isn’t. She is not Sick and breathing on her own.
Do you really think Micheal wanted the Money in order to divorce Terri in a quiet and peaceful Death? I don’t think Micheal wanted the Divorce knowing well that he would lose the Divorce Case in Court. That is what its all about, Winning in Every Court Case for the past 15 yrs. That is why he kept on feeding it and feeding it, winning ALL of the Cases, and I don’t know how he got the Right Judge Greer to do the dirty tricks for him to win every case. Was Judge Greer bought out from this Medical Trust? Who knows? It was all about Control for Micheal. He even controlled her Autospy, and Cremated her right away, and still controlling her Burial Plot keeping the Family away. Once she is in the Burial Plot, I hope this will end. Micheal will thirst for more attention, so his Controlling days are not over, not by a long shot. He would try keep the Family away at all cost and perhaps looking for Movie Deals/TV Deals? Terri is Dead, and I hope she rest in Peace, and I hope Micheal can stop right there and stop controlling. He is a Control freak and partcipated in Killing of another Person which is against the Law, which by Florida Laws, Mercy Killing is Illegal. I don’t know why the Judge Greer let the Law go and go in favour of Micheal in every turn and he was caught saying, “Where are we meeting this Weekend?”- Is this a Meeting to play Golf between Felos, Greer and Micheal? If that is true, that shows that Judge Greer is biased and not impartial when it comes to Schivao-Schindler Case. I really hope we can protect all Disabled People and change New Laws to protect the Disabled. I just think this is Plain Wrong and if my Husband said he don’t want to be put this way, I AM NOT PARTCIPATING IN KILLING HIM. I AM NOT LETTING HIS BLOOD ON MY HANDS. I TOLD HIM HE WOULD HAVE TO DO IT HIMSELF WHICH WILL BE SUICIDE INSTEAD OF MURDER. Death Choices should be made by the Person themselves only, without the help of another Hand to pull the lever, in the matter of speaking. If you want to do it yourself in the Death Bed, you should have a Cynaide inserted in your Teeth so you can bite on it and die by Poison. Makes it easier for all of us that we don’t have to “kill” you in that process and avoid Murder charges. ;)
April 2nd, 2005 at 10:27 pm
Wow, that was pretty much a waste of webspace.
April 2nd, 2005 at 10:31 pm
But entertaining.
April 3rd, 2005 at 3:52 am
Cut the crap, and pick up your shit on the way out. What people need to do is focus on the solution and not the problem. Yes, it is a tragedy that Terri died in the way she did, we treat our animals with more compassion. Learn from it and do something about it, don’t just whine about what happened and take control your life. NO! I’m not saying go march on city hall or find blame within someone else’s views of the subject. Each person, as an individual, will have their own opinion on this and how to live THEIR life in general. Respect that, as you would have them respect your wishes; most of you should know the phrase: ‘Do upon others as you would have them do upon you’. Death should be private, not plastered all over the news, talk with you spouse, family, clergyman, or whoever you trust to handle your affairs after you no longer can, be you in a PVS or have passed. And by God, do a Living Will, don’t let the anguish that WILL be suffered by your family on having to make that choice for you!
April 3rd, 2005 at 2:09 pm
I Wonder:
Well said, I think it is high time to either change new Laws to protect Life and limit the Euthanasia to only the Terminally Ill, and should not be for the Healthy or Disabled People. But to interpret which Law is appropriate for each Person is a difficult task. But we all know that God said all Life should be respected, no matter how we look at it.
If this was Hitler that imposed on us here in America, we would be outraged. It looked like the Hitler saga has moved into USA and make their home in Florida. Florida by the looks of it, it is doomed. It has all the Sexual Pedophiles killing Children, about 1800 Sexual Offenders still missing in Florida, and the Hurricanes, and Election Inconstiencies with Jeb Bush and Pres. Bush, and now this. I have heard the Floridians are moving out of there to avoid being pulled into Hell Hole.
I would not want some one make a choice for me. Living Wills may be a good idea, but also a bad idea that the Religion Churches will challenge them saying that Mercy Killing or Euthanasisa would not be tolerated, and protect any aspects of Life, no matter what. But the boundaries, they agree, however that the very Terminally Ill such as Advanced Cancer and AIDS or other Serious Aliments that has no hope of Living anymore can go about their Wishes to die faster. One way or another, they should die of Natural Causes, not Murder or Killing from another Person. Florida Laws has Mercy Killing as Illegal and I don’t know why Judge Greer broke that very Law. I don’t care how you look at it or interpret that Brain Damage or Disabled, but not Terminally Ill, should die no matter what, It is still considered Life and should be Protected at all cost and they have the Right to Die by Natural Causes, not killing them. There is so much Atrocioity in this World, and it stops here. God Created Life and we should continue for all eternity and for all Generations such as our Families. If we keep on saying Die and Die, there will be no purpose for being here. I would say “Why are you even here at all?” If you don’t like your Life, just Die. It is your Choice but we know that if we choose Life, we have a lot to gain with Blessings, and if we choose Death, we can be cursed. I noticed in all the Changes in the World, that Religions does not matter anymore and there are more Atheists here that does not believe in God, then why are they living at all if they don’t believe in it? What do they believe? Revolution? That we came from Monkeys? That we came from Gaseous spirit, that we came itself from Cells? What?! You tell me. We cannot possibly just “poof” and put on Earth, and for what Reason do we have to do here beside just copulate? Ya can have Sex like Rabbits and produce Children, but if you don’t believe in that, don’t have sex or copulate? Just stop right there. You see? Life has its Meaning and we are here for all Eternity. Some People believe that there will be a Destruction of the World, that the Comet will kill us all, or the Earth Quakes will kill us all, or we just blow up with Nuclear Bombs. Well the Reality of this, it is all Real, everything is. It is just all Evil that Control this World and we are in it. We can either believe in God, or you don’t. Just end right there if you don’t believe in God. The World operates that way for a Reason, we can say we are all doomed to Hell, and this is it. You may be Right and what can we do to stop it? We cannot until the Destruction will take place and who knows? We can make anew with new Life? How about this way? Death is an Eternity. Would you believe that instead?
April 3rd, 2005 at 3:49 pm
See what I miss when I don’t look at lies.com for a few days? :-)
Two things I want to say. First, it’s taken my breath away the way people can make assumptions and judgements about the actions and motivations of people they know nothing about.
Secondly, I can only hope that the people who kept this bloody fight going in Congress and the media and on the web will one day have their personal medical and family matters dragged across the national stage. I can only hope that as they sit by the bedside of someone they love, they will have Randall Terry in the hallway, giving a live interview to CNN.
April 3rd, 2005 at 7:23 pm
I’m a firm believer that attacks on the individual during a debate are generally the weakest arguement and generally just outright petty. That being said; Jen, do we attribute your writing ‘style’ to a room tempurature IQ, homeschooling, or are we just kinda picking up English on the side?
April 4th, 2005 at 9:20 am
Strangely enough, I saw no criticism of Jen’s writing ‘style’ when she was in agreement with your arguments. I have disagreed, and debated her on many issues, but without inappropriate personal criticism. She obviously got her point across quite effectively.
April 4th, 2005 at 10:43 am
I totally agree with teachervet. All of you are of the liberal cult of death like the abortionists. You ignore the obvious facts in the Terri case. You support the life of criminals but you hate the lives of the innocent. That is why you are a death cult. Bush was right to support Terri Schiavo. It takes a man of God to go against the death cult. All of you are being brainwashed by the liberal media that is also in favor of death. Stupid liberals. You are probably the same people who believe that no WMD were found in Iraq (what a joke, another obvious lie told by the television media, only FOX is reporting the truth on that one). You are addicted to the television lies when the truth is on the radio 24 hours a day. All you need to do is turn on Limbaugh or Hannity, but all of you are afraid of facing the truth. How stupid can you be?
April 4th, 2005 at 10:53 am
TeacherVet- It doesn’t take an English teacher to see the obviouse flaws in Jen’s writing. Her inability to work the phrase “the fault of the Bush Administration” into her post is almost inexcusable, and really detracts from her argument.
April 4th, 2005 at 2:54 pm
TeacherVet, could you point to all the cases where I’ve agreed with Jen? I’m willing to bet there might be more than one ‘Jen’ posting here, since I’m pretty sure the captialization of all the common nouns would have stood out.
April 4th, 2005 at 2:55 pm
Bushpatriot – let go of the right wing hate media
April 4th, 2005 at 2:59 pm
I was on a weblog the other day when the moderator called a political opponent “Mcfucktard.” Was that hate speech? Was I falling prey to “hate media?”
April 4th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
It is nice to know that ya all so quick to judge or what you may call “criticizing” (I apologize for the spelling but it is close enough) criticizing my writing style. Ya all are so quick to judge before you can really know this person-me. What happens if I told you my writing style has some grammatical errors, that I am Deaf?
Oh yeah, I fall into Disabled Persons List. Why don’t you just pull the feeding tube out of my belly button and just kill me? That will be one less Disabled Person in this World. What happens if you and I can talk like normal people? Sure I can talk just like you, I had extensive speech therapy but has poor grammatical writing. I apologize if I am not bright enough for you, but I am not going to have to explain my self every time I meet or write on the Board. Every one has a distinct talent, some intelligent, some really stupid. That is what makes the World go around.
For the reason, I mention Bush is to remind Teacher Vet, that we’ve debated on another board before for quite some time. He knows me and I have disagreed with him but this one is the only one that is close to my Heart, and I have finally come to terms to agree with Teacher Vet for once. Don’t you think that is nice to get along with other People even if you don’t agree with them?
As for the people that failed to check the Case by researching its files, it is nothing all Talk but seems to be moot for you. We have read and read all the files with backup links and I have come to the conclusion that Micheal Schivao is guilty of Medical Trust Fraud and waited 7 years later knowing that the statue of limitations on Insurance Fraud expired then he went the Legal Way to find on how to kill Terri effectively and gets to keep the Medical Trust Money plus if any, Life Insurance Policy on her later if that come to surface. But Micheal fails to know that there is no Statue of Limitations on Murder.
April 4th, 2005 at 8:10 pm
I’ve also met alot of people that would agree that the Judical System in Florida has serious flaws and the Laws need to be changed. Judge Greer is the most biased Judge I have ever seen and he is friends with George Felos. The Supreme Courts and the Appeals Court has no choice but to follow Judge Greer, they have to be in the same like band of brothers. It is amazing that People want to put in Living Wills more than ever, wanting to Die in the way they wanted.
The Culture of Death may have won over the Santicity of Life, but it won’t have any blessings, but will have its Curses in their Life. I will have this to say that Florida is doomed and it is because they have examples that fails the Judical System every time they go in there. But don’t forget it has other Political problems in Florida as well.
Such Examples like Elian Gonzalez, Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, President Bush, Missing Sex Pedophiles, and so many Hurricanes and they are not getting the Money from Federal Aid, not that much if you may think. Did you know that there is 1800 missing Sex Offenders that are lost in Florida somewhere that the Police had no track of? They are registered within the Sex Registry, but somehow, they are lost in the quagmire of Florida or Swamp Florida. Florida is doomed. Many are seeking to move out of Florida to avoid their wrath that can be imposed on them.
I don’t know if I am glad that I live in Canada and not in Florida. But the Evil exists there, and could spread all around America. It could have been you or me or your Family. Can you imagine some one has a total control over your Body-whether or not if you want to Die or Live? It does not matter as long the Money goes to them. Money cannot be trusted and it can make them do evil things that would harm them and the People. They will start doing foolish things but at the end they will lead a very, very Sad Life. That is what happening to Micheal Schivao. He is in fact in hiding right now, under Police Protection and had to explain to their Children why they did what they had to do since the Children from School asked them what their Dad or Uncle just did. We do not impose any Violence on him, nor we do not wish to do so but the fact that he made the Death Choice on Terri and had inflicted more Pain on himself and his Family. It is called Family Curse. They will be cursed for years to come because People look at them like he is a Murderer of 21st Century. If he made the right decision of Life, we would not be here discussing this very Topic. Period.
Rest in Peace Terri Schivao and we shall try change new Laws to protect Disabled and Voiceless People of Today. We have to be on the Err on the Side of Life since God created Life.
April 4th, 2005 at 8:24 pm
Jayson: Such parnonia. What if the Capitalization of my nouns is simply yelling at YOU.
Rest easy, my friend, I am only the one Jen around here. I don’t know if there are others. There could be more Amandas out there that would just disagree with you and in capitalization.
Cheers, Jen. (have some beer);)
Hey what ya think of the Pope that died, is that uncanny and so close to Terri’s Death? I think they are having a meeting some place, like if you would believe in the Heavens. I cannot wait for the next new Pope so he can call this Murder. Oh yeah, they already did. Shame on Micheal. Good kudos to them.
April 5th, 2005 at 6:08 am
I think we need to impose an age limit on who can post here. Or at least introduce a simple aptitude testto keep these idiots outta here.
BushPatriot
If Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity etc. were so good at telling the truth, why is it that viewers and listeners of those shows tend to be the most mis-informed people in the country? Why is that?
Even viewers of the Daily Show with John Stewart are more informed with factual information than viewers of those shows listed above. The sad thing is, the Daily Show isn’t even an actual news show, but they report the truth in a very entertaining way which obviously resonates with people.
You should check it out sometime, get yourself educated then come back and post here.
Hey Jen, if you want to talk about MURDER, let’s talk some Iraq/Gitmo Bay/Afghanistan.
I’ll be here.
April 5th, 2005 at 7:44 am
Holy crap! Liberals, conservatives, and nuts — oh my!
See — I have a different take on this. I feel that it’s pretty sad that we do not have any legal form of euthanasia in this country. It may not be appropriate for the Terri Schiavo case, but every time I thought about that woman starving to death — it makes me think that she’d probably have been better off with a lethal injection of morphine. What a retarded state of affairs we’re in that we can let someone starve to death in order to end their life, but we can’t intervene to help speed up the process.
I really have to wonder, how much of that has to do with the hippocratic oath versus the religious factor? I’m leaning towards the latter, since doctors don’t trnd to cram laws down our throats because of any oath they’ve taken. Religious folks, on the other hand — they love to tell us how to run our lives even more than left-wingers do.
So…what have we learned from this? Nothing. We already knew how the right-to-lifers play up the tear-jerk crap — trying to make their opponents out to look like cold, heartless bastards…all the while ruthlessly pushing a political agenda without much care for the people whose rights that they trample in the process.
The right-to-lifer’s obvious retort is ‘what about the innocent babies and people like Terri Schiavo, who can’t speak for themselves, don’t they have rights?’ My feeling: unborn babies don’t really have rights beyond their mother’s wishes, and yeah, folks in a vegetative state have rights, but need to rely on loved ones to make decisions for them — especially when they didn’t write a living will.
So where does this leave someone who doesn’t believe in God? I mean, the roots of this seem to be at “only God gets to decide when to take a life”. What scares me is that the converse has been used for the justification of all kinds of killing in the name of God (‘It is God’s will’). I mean, the first act of “modern” monotheism was sorta genocidal (I love this story). Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the ten commandments, and saw the idol of the golden goat. He re-read the first commandment, freaked out, smashed the tablets, and separated the people into two groups — one that wanted to worship his God, and everyone else who wanted to worship a golden goat. Moses’ group slaughtered those goat-fuckers. What about the goat-peoples’ rights? It’s in the Bible, so these are the values that religious-folk teach their children in school (and what the religious-folk want your children to be taught too). Does this mean that Judeo-Christian children are taught that everyone has rights except for those goat-fucking heathens who don’t believe in our God?
For all intents and purposes, I’m a goat-fucking heathen, and I call bullshit on the Christian Right-To-Life movement. Furthermore, I extend this bullshit call to a large portion of the Terri Schiavo Christian Right-To-Lifers. Murder? Yeah, right — murder, my ass. If you want murder, look in that “history” book called the Bible.
As far as my actual opinion on Terri Schiavo goes: I don’t have one. This thing has been so skewed by the media, I don’t know what to think. How many times did they show that clip with Terri looking at that ball? Any chance that 3-second clip was taken out of context? Seeing as how it was only 3 seconds, it appears that the goal was to use that clip as a tool to capitalize on the emotions of onlookers and turn this thing into a goddamned circus. It worked extremely well. I tend to believe that the courts did see all of the information and probably did the right thing. Then again, how could we know — we’ve seen what’s mostly an attempt to capitalize on our emotions and heard a bunch of muck being flung across the room. I guess we won’t know until the results of the autopsy are released and the facts of that are distorted by both sides in a public way which will ultimately demean Terri’s life and death in a way that she would have probably despised.
Cynical? Guilty as charged.
April 5th, 2005 at 10:46 am
RiseAgainst – You didn’t strike me as the kind of guy who gets his news from stand up comedians. Wouldn’t it be better to trump Limbaugh and company with NPR, a good newspaper or perhaps a book or two? John Stewart’s funny, and he’s not an uninformed man, but he is a comedian hosting a talk show on Comedy Central, which doesn’t raise his cache much above Sean Hannity’s, as far as I’m concerned.
This should probably be dealt with elsewhere, but I think there is a good argument to be made that part of the the problem with the Schievo debate, or any debate in the present climate is too many of the debaters are getting their information from radio personalities, while too many others are getting their information from Comedy Central.
April 5th, 2005 at 12:12 pm
Leftbehind:
I get my news from all sorts outlets, be it tv or radio, newspapers or the internet.
I was only trying to point out that people who watch a comedian tell the news are more informed on issues than people who watch or listen to actual “news” programs on, thats all.
I do agree with your point, but for the record i am not basing my arguments on what John Stewart said or any other person for that matter.
I too think that news is becoming more customized to suit thier viewers, and people just watch what they want to hear. I just like Stewart ’cause he’s f*uckin hillarous. I’ve yet to see anyone else that reports the days events in such an entertaining way.
April 5th, 2005 at 12:18 pm
Sorry for the swear, I really didn’t mean to do that.
April 5th, 2005 at 12:35 pm
Don’t worry about the swear – nobody else seems to care, and you’re right about John Stewart -he is a really funny, and insightful guy!
April 5th, 2005 at 1:37 pm
Oh…it wasn’t a goat. It was a calf. Goat-fucker is a funnier term than calf-fucker, so it probably stuck in my head…oh, and the satanic imagery associated iwth the goat thing.
Oh well.
April 6th, 2005 at 10:06 am
Quoting Jen:
Jen, I don’t believe in your God, so those laws natrualy don’t apply to me. Maybe people who believe in your God should concentrate on following the rules laid down for you, rather than attempt prescribe how the rest of us should live our lives (based on dogmatic beliefs). I don’t understand why religious people like yourself have such a hard time respecting the fact that not everyone believes in your God and associated rules. Rather than looking in an old book for absolutes (that are conveniently broken whenever necessary), I will continue to look both inward and outward, using logic as a basis for ethical guidance…and with the understanding that there is no black or white, especially in cases like this.
…Besides, what’s so bothersome is that euthanasia is illegal in this country. The only way that a person can be legally “euthanized” in this country is to remove life support (or a feeding tube). The whole point of this is that it’s not actively killing someone. It’s just not using machinery which allows them to survive when their body cannot otherwise. It goes back to your dogmatic ideal that all life is precious and only God gets to decide when to take a life. In any case, this is not what euthanasia is Furthermore, you’re right — we treat our pets better than that. We will quickly end their lives using drugs. Unfortunately, it’s the same religious logic that you’re using that has brought us to where we are now.
April 6th, 2005 at 9:30 pm
ethan-P…you don’t believe in God, so laws intended to protect life don’t apply to you? Strange, indeed.
__________
Jen and I have disagreed on just about every political topic brought up on this site….but not the human rights issue of killing Terri Schiavo.
Many laws are based on precedent, and the future effects of precedents set in the Schiavo case are frightening. Jen can be classified as disabled, handicapped, or grouped in whatever classification you wish, but I understand her personal concern when folks treat the fate of the disabled in such a lackadaisical manner.
She refers to herself as disabled, and I might even argue with her on the definition of that term. Her grasp of a language she has not even been able to hear is nothing short of amazing. Her writing style has always been consistent, but never criticized (except for a single instance, months ago, by a jerk right-winger) until she disagreed with Terri’s killing. My statement in that regard was not directed toward any individual poster, it was quite general.
___________
leftbehind: Your statement about Jen’s failure to include your favorite phrase makes absolutely no sense. Must that phrase be used before you can apply credibility to any argument?
April 7th, 2005 at 4:04 am
Let’s just say its use will work wonders with this particulaer audience.
April 7th, 2005 at 7:05 am
Actually, I was referring laws based on dogmatic ideals without any root in secular ethics. No, those ideals don’t apply to me. It’s not that the laws shouldn’t apply to me — the laws based on those ideals shouldn’t exist in the first place. If you want laws like that, move to Iran. I understand that they have plenty of BS laws based on religious ideals.
You should know that the term “protecting life” is a relative thing. Religious people have different standards than I do when it comes to protecting life. Personally, I wouldn’t have had anything to do with the Crusades. I suppose that protecting life means sometehing along the lines of “CONVERT OR DIE YOU HEATHEN FUCKER!” Or what about those people who murdered ob/gyn’s who perform abortions in order to “protect life”? Statistically, most of those people believe in capital punishment too. Strange, how come protecting life doesn’t apply there? I thought that only God got to decide when to take a life? I mean seriously, how many people have died in the name of god throughout history? What about in recent history? I watched thousands die in the name of God first-hand a few years ago. Protecting life my ass.
If I believed that the religious folk were serious about protecting life, I’d put some stock what you’re saying. But killing in the name of God has been quite a popular thing to do ever since the Judeo-Christian ideal of one God began (I wouldn’t want to leave the Islamic fundamentalists out of this — they seem to like the concept too). You’re not protecting life, you’re pushing your dogmatic ideal on the rest of us (the “only God gets to take a life” ideal). I don’t buy it.
Furthermore, you mention “killing Terri Schiavo”. That’s one of the things that really bugs me about this whole thing. Nobody killed anyone. All that was done was cessation of mechanical life support. This is the problem with the religious ideal that’s our current law (FWIW, many other western countries don’t have laws like this on the books). People can’t be killed (contrary to your statement). We treat our pets with more dignity than humans. You can unplug ’em and wait for them to starve to death painfully, but nobody can draw up a syringe full of morphine and let them go peacefully, and without pain. There’s your religious ideal that shouldn’t apply to me. If I’m in a vegetative state — don’t unplug me and wait weeks for me to die painfully — fill me up with drugs! Kill me! As far as “killing” anyone, you’re just wrong there. They let her die. There’s a huge difference, and you should know better.
Again, I’m on the fence with the Schaivo case, as you should be. None of us have any idea what was really going on with this media circus. People here are still trying to cram their interpretation of Michael Schiavo’s motives down our throats. You don’t know what they were. (“When’s the bitch gonna die”…”hateful, cruel SOB” — you should be ashamed of yourself.) Have you taked to Michael Schiavo? Have you spoken with the Schindlers? What do you really know of their intentions? The fact is that you don’t, and you shouldn’t be so quick to judge. Shit, you haven’t had access to all of the facts that the federal judges have…but you still know what’s best. I’m not just talking about you — I’m talking about everyone who has drawn a line in the sand on either side. We just don’t know, and with all of the media spin that’s occured, we just won’t.
April 7th, 2005 at 8:29 am
Two nights ago I trapped a raccoon that has been raiding the cat food dispenser in my garage. If I keep him in the trap, not providing food and water, I’m not killing him? He’s in the second day right now – I’ll let you know the results.
April 7th, 2005 at 8:50 am
“When’s the bitch gonna die” was a quote from Michael Schiavo, provided to the court in an affidavit, under penalty of purjury.
“hateful, cruel SOB” was a quote from me, based in part on the first quote. My opinion is also founded in events following her death. The actions of the man are beyond reason or understanding. The family is refused to even have a lock of her hair by Michael Schiavo, and my opinion of the man stands. No, I have not talked to him, but he has talked to us, both through the media (complete with tear-jerking piano accompaniment) and with his actions.
There was only a single finding of fact in this case, and our judiciary steadfastly and consistently refused to review those facts. The battle to restore “power balanced, separate but equal” branches of government is only beginning, and the eventual results, whatever the outcome, will affect each and every one of us.
April 7th, 2005 at 9:39 am
Said by a person with an obvious agenda. She said a whole lot of questionable stuff, and like the 5 second video clips that we all saw, you’re taking it out of context. In that same affidavit, she makes wild accusations about attempted murder with insulin. And since when has the penalty of purjury been a deterrent to a person lying? What makes her testimony more credible than the other sworn testimonies which are contradictory to hers? Oh right — she affirmed your pre-existing beliefs, so you took her word for it.
You clearly have an agenda as well. You are hearing the information that you want to, and only those which support your agenda. You’re not unbiased, and as I had said before, should be ashamed of yourself for that. You don’t care about facts — you only want to be right.
Furthermore, your raccon analogy is irrelevant to this case and doesn’t deserve any addressing beyond saying that your intentions seem pretty cruel (klling a trapped animal to prove a point about a case about which you’ve received distorted facts).
I’m curious, however. What was this single finding of fact? Is it a fact, or a “fact”?
April 7th, 2005 at 9:50 am
TeacherVet, read below for Judge Greer’s statement regarding what you believe Mr. Schiavo said. I hope that you don’t believe everything you hear that affirms your preconceptions.
April 7th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
I think I’ll address the racoon analogy. It’s just f*cking stupid.
April 7th, 2005 at 6:29 pm
Stupid, I agree. Not cruel, surely you must agree. Right now he seems okay, but there’s no visible state of euphoria yet…evidence of anger.
April 7th, 2005 at 7:01 pm
The original court case (1993?) was the legal “finding of fact,” and every subsequent court proceeding has been decided based on the “facts” as they were established in that case. The other two “equal” branches of our government demanded a complete review of the case, but the arrogance of the judges was evidenced when they ignored Congressional subpoenas and legislation – issued by the supposed law-making body.
If there has been a second full review, someone out there needs to tell the world when it happened.
Judge Greer found that the evidence did not fit the facts as they had been established in the original trial. Is judicial review only a thing of the past?
Ethan-P, your comments could be reflected back at you almost verbatim. Are you not listening to, believing, only the testimony that fits your pre-conceived notions? Your not unbaised, as you said, and should be ashamed of yourself for that. You don’t care about testimony from a number of witnesses who provided affidavits about their observations while taking care of the woman – some of them coming forward even though they had been told they would lose their jobs if they did so – you only want to be right.
It’s strange that you would characterize my treatment of a raccoon as “cruel.” I live in the country, with several dogs, cats (manx and ragdolls) and livestock, so I obviously enjoy animals. I keep live animal traps because I hate to kill intrusive wild animals, always taking them several miles from my home to drop them in the wild. The coyotes I can’t catch that way, so I shoot them – most are rabid. I have lost sleep the last couple of nights because I think it is cruel to kill via dehydration – something called a conscience. I wish I could share it.
April 7th, 2005 at 7:13 pm
Well so much for not commenting. The real point of contention here seems to be the state of the living individual. The real arguement here actually seems to be what state was Terri in. There are some of us who are inclined to believe the overwhelming majority of Doctors that she was in a state where she was insensible to any stimulation and incapable of any concious thought what-so-ever; those parts of her brain responsible for higher functions having been destroyed. If thats true then the parts that made her, well her, were gone and never coming back. She couldn’t think, she couldn’t do anything, the autonomic nervous system was in control. The point being if this diagnosis is correct, and we’re assuming it was, then she wouldn’t haven been any more aware of starving to death than she was of anything else.
So the big difference between say, Terri and the racoon, is that the racoon is aware that he’s starving, thats probably one of the reasons he’s angry. If you poked him he’d probably yelp, having felt pain and been capable of responding, and thats the whole point. If we cut out all the parts of his brain except his heart/lung function would whats left even be a racoon?
Thats actually what I see as the issue here. If we accept the consensus diagnosis of Terri then no cruelty was done, the parts that make a person a person were gone or terminally nonfunctional. If you don’t accept the diagnosis then yeah, that was pretty cruel.
April 7th, 2005 at 7:27 pm
One more thing. TeacherVet, there was a point here, where based on another post I had some level of respect to for you, which though you certainly do not care about, is rapidly diminishing. I’m not sure if I’m supposed the jerk right-winger (first time for right-winger, old hand at jerk) but I’d like to offer up a few comments about your comments. I’m not a regular poster here, I’ve been much more active recently, but its safe to say months, maybe even a year went by since I registered here and my recent post, during which I missed a lot of the action here. So I’ve never read anything Jen posted before reading her posts in this thread. You said that I’d agreed with her in the past, which I don’t recall, but since you couldn’t point that out, I’m saying no I didn’t. As for her writing never being critizied, who cares? I’ll be the first to critizie it then, it stinks. I’m disagreeing with you on this too and I’ve never said you’re a bad writer.
April 8th, 2005 at 8:06 am
Teachervet, it doesn’t work like that. I’m not passing judgement on anyone but you. You’ve passed judgement on everyone involved with this case from the start, based on youe preconceived notions. Furthermore, I haven’t formed an opinion on what was the right thing to do in this case…because like I said, all sides of the case have turned it into a media circus, taking most parts of this out of context. Furthermore, your semantics indicate your position on the issue. It’s like calling Microsoft M$ and trying to still be impartial. It can be difficult to make a convincing argument when you’ve indicated your bias from the start. (But I guess that this doesn’t count as critical essay writing or anything.)
With regards to our discussion, I’ve only passed along what I’ve read of the court records. I dismissed testimony as not really credible, but this was mostly due to the court decision. It does go a bit further, the testimony that you mention makes wild and completely unfounded accucations (in this case, regarding insulin poisioning). It’s easy to dismiss that, the same way it’s easy to dismiss the ultra-left’s unfounded conspiracy theories regarding our president. They make wild and unfounded accusations, and it wanes their credibility. What really influenced me was that Judge Greer excluded it from court record, and made a compelling argument for his dismissal. Are you suggesting that the news media is more impartial than our federal court system? I have little faith in our government, but tend to put more faith in our judicial branch than any other branch of our government. I have not passed along any opinion with regard to Schiavo, however I have made a comment regarding the greater issue of euthanasia, and went on to argue how removing a feeding tube does not fit the definition of euthenasia. The bias you’re accusing me of; I’m not sure how it relates to this case. Are you putting words in my mouth? Does my pointing out your bias equal a judgement of the people involved? The only opinions that I offered that were actually related to this case were:
(And this is as ambigous as the ruling itself. Which loved ones? I didn’t indicate, because I don’t really know.) I also explicitly said:
I still don’t know what to think. Does that offend you? Do you really think that everyone in this case has given their honest assesment in their testimonies? If everyone did, then there is a paradox in the case logic. Are the only people who lied people whose views you disagree with? That seems pretty conveniently black-and-white. I have a hard time believing that too. This is an extremely complicated case where the press has caught onto a few talking points and they grabbed some soundbites and video clips (out of context, mind you) in order to envoke strong emotions in all of us so they can sell us more news.
It helps to put your emotions aside and take a step backwards and look at what’s being done here. It’s a damn circus, and in the end, everybody loses because of it.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. You earlier stated that you’ve trapped a raccoon and are intentionally starving it to death, and I’m assuming that it’s just to prove a political point:
I understand the need to animal trapping, and you’ve unnecessarily justified some of your actions…but the intentional starving of an animal in order to prove a political point, I tend to think of that as cruel (and I’m not even into animal rights).
April 8th, 2005 at 12:06 pm
After posting last night, I made a 2-hour round-trip to Land Between the Lakes and released the ‘coon back into the wild. My wife had told me from the beginning that I wouldn’t be able to follow through and, as usual, SWMBO was right.
Proving a political point? That can’t be accurate. I had become angry over stated opinions from death-doctors and lawyers that death by dehydration was not cruel, and was, “in fact,” a quiet, peaceful, loving method of euthanasia – always including “we believe,” “we think,” or “probably.” They simply don’t know, although the few people who have been interviewed in the media, people who eventually survived the treatment, have said that their minds and bodies were literally screaming out for food and water. At the risk of being labeled, I believe we should always “err on the side of life.”
Ethan-P, I am actually as conflicted as you, even though it isn’t readily obvious. I don’t know whether Terri Schiavo had any brain activity, but neither does anyone else. When my daughter, Jenny, was flown to Vanderbilt Hospital in 1996 with encephalitis, a CT-scan was done immediately. That gave the doctors only a “blurred still photograph” of the damage, but the head of the team of doctors told us that at CT-scan “never gives us conclusive evidence,” ordering an MRI before he could actually assess the damage, or evidence of brain activity in particular sections of her brain.
No conclusive tests were ever done on Terri Schiavo – Michael wouldn’t allow them. She was killed on the basis of evidence provided by a blurry photograph, justified by an attorney with an admitted background in activist group activities pushing for “removal” of disabled folks. If she was brain-dead, I understand and support removal of artificial life-support when the patient has made that request. The new definitions of “artificial life support” are frightening. As for methodology, I honestly prefer the Kevorkain method.
Did Terri Schiavo ever express her desires? We don’t know, except for the hearsay testimony of 3 people, all with the surname Schiavo, and none of whom “remembered” it until several years later. Any testimony that conflicted with the desired outcome was dismissed. Does anyone doubt that the courts can make mistakes; see the Dred Scott decision, to cite only a single instance. A woman was condemned to death, based on contentious hearsay evidence, and without accurate knowledge of brain activity. Dred Scott was reversible; Terri Schiavo is not – err on the side of life?
I suppose the biggest question I have (among many unanswered ones) is: Why did Michael never allow an MRI, a very basic diagnostic test? He had sufficient funds, so the expense is not a valid reason. If anyone can find a way to justify it, I’d love to hear it. As I said, I’m truly conflicted on her death, but I’m very suspicious of her husband’s motivation.
This seems incomplete, albeit lengthy, but I have to travel to Georgia to spend the weekend with my mother. I will be anxious to get back home to read the replies. I don’t do a lot of surfing, so, as usual, I’m relying mostly on the info I get on this site.
As I stated earlier, I think I’m justified in criticizing the inconsistent criticism of Jen’s writing style. She states her opinions as well as she can. I try to correspond with my cousins in Holland using the Dutch language, and I’m sure they laugh at the butchering job; but it’s the best I can do, and they seem to respect the efforts. Their English skills are almost equally imperfect, but I never fail to grasp meaning. Probably not a good analogy, since they are not “handicapped.”
April 8th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
Jayson, the “jerk right-winger” had ridiculed Jen’s writing style as part of his very biased support of Bush, the war, etc., so rest assured it was not you. There are jerks on both sides of the aisle, and this guy, regrettably, was “one of us” on the “right.” His abusive language was embarrassing to me since he was posting in support of my position.
After Jen informed him in a subsequent post that she was deaf, he refused to apologize. It was “many moons ago,” and you were certainly not the poster. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
April 8th, 2005 at 1:10 pm
Accepting the learning barrier not being able to hear a language poses to being able to write it, I will say “I’m sorry Jen.” It’s not really valid criticism if biological defect is the culprit.
April 8th, 2005 at 6:28 pm
Whatever you say. It does not at least bother me. If some one criticize me, it is the same person who is ignorant himself. Who cares? We are the People. We breathe the same air, have the same red blood, eat the same old shit, sleep, and have sex. It becomes of a norm in everyday’s Life. We must do this and that like a routine same old shit.
Ethan: I do respect that you don’t believe in God, alright, but since you are Living and breathing, why are you even here at all? I have to address the word “killing” as you call it, you would say that it is not exactly killing when some one pulls a feeding tube or whatever, but you do forget often times, that it contains a HAND to pull the thing. A HAND that has to pull in order to ASSIST, in that process killing her to the End by Starvation. If she did it herself, then it is suicide. But hell no, she could not do it, so some one has to do it. It is some one’s hand that pulled out that Feeding Tube. It is called Killing or Murder. Because it involves a Hand touching a weapon, causing Starvation in that process. If it was a Gun, it would be the same thing – Killing or Murder. No matter how you look at it, they have blood on their hands since they pulled that thing.
One got to know what if her wishes was not true? WHAT IF? Would you feel better if her wishes was in fact was not really her wishes? Would we still pull her feeding tube anyways? Why? Just because she is what? Disabled? Brain Damaged? Cannot move? Too much of a burden on the Medical Insurance? A policy in place to get rid of Disabled?
Since we are breathing and living, we have that right to Live. You and me have that right. She did not have that right because her rights were denied or I would call it “violated”. We have to start from some where and end to death. We believe in what we want. You are right. Sorry for the imposing but one has to wonder why Life is valuable at all.
Why don’t we just die tomorrow. All of us? You see? We have a purpose to Live, but for that purpose some people have nothing to believe on so why Live at all? Why don’t you end your Life right there? If the answer is no way, then it comes in question to what Life contains and why we have to continue Living at all or if not nothing at all. People argue about Creatism every day. We came from Monkeys, we came from Cells, we came from Dust, we came from God, we came from Nothing, we came from Hot air, whatever. Then why ask questions?
Once a Kid came to me, she said that she dreamed about the Black Universe, and she floated around seeing like Nothingness and she would not breathe up there. She said oh, why do I dream a such thing?! She would see Galaxies, Stars, Black hole, full of black skies, but no Planets at all. She would say I had to come from there and came here on Earth to Live. Then she would say Some one did dream the same dream as I did. Not one person, but a few. The exact Dream. Life is full of Mystery and we don’t know all the answers. We are given a Purpose to Live to find out that answer. That is why we live so long to hopefully solve that Mystery. It is amazing that the World did not blow up just yet. (lol) From Nuclear Bomb I mean. There has to be a reason to prevent it.
April 8th, 2005 at 6:46 pm
Starvation is a beautiful, calm, serene death? Then why is she on Morphine if she is feeling Pain? Starvation is painful, always full of hunger, gives you a bad headache, always thirsting for fluid, and cramps. It is anything but calm, and beautiful. It is far from it. I have watched my Grandmother dying slowly from Cancer, she would not eat, and she is always moaning in Pain.
We can starve up to 3 days, then back to normal by eating again. We often feel the pains of bad headache, dizziness, lightheadness, cramps in our stomach, and dryness on our lips, pain on our throat. I have starved 3 days before, and I am telling you it is not CALM or beautiful about it, it is painful.
Terri moaned and moaned in Pain, that is why they gave her Morphine. It is not beautiful. It is cruel. When she in fact died, then it is calm there after. Notice the word AFTER. Not during the starvation phase. If I starved for two weeks, that must be feeling like hell. I never never want to feel that –bad headache, it is worst than a hangover. I am telling you for a fact. Throbbing pain. I would suggest you starve for at least 2 days and report back to me. It is not calm and beautiful as they claimed. Listening to Music while starving? What if she hated that Music over and over?! Die with Dignity? yea my ass. I have to agree with Teacher vet, Micheal’s actions are suspicious. Why did he use Terri’s Medical Trust to pay for all the Legal Fees instead of caring for Terri? He took the money for himself, and he is in hiding right now, and told the Media that he is moving from Florida soon, of course with Terri’s Death Money.
April 8th, 2005 at 7:01 pm
Ethan, I can understand what you mean about not believing in some one’s God. I don’t even believe the Pope himself, he is just a Man. But one has to wonder why we are even here at all?
I have went all over and studied most Religions. Except for Jewish. I have found that Muslim and Christians have the same belief “You treat the Person as you would do yourself.” And another they believe that Messiah, the Prophet from Muslim and do believe that Jesus is also a Prophet, a Messiah. A Messenger.
Most break Bread and even dipping in Oil, Wine, or whatever. Even an atheist I talked to, could not talk about Facts at all, in having not studied at all. I noticed most Religions have long robes, what is the obession about long robes? and Veil and Turbans? Even the Pope has one. Was shocked to see more Black coming into Catholicsim.
But most People in all Religions agree on one thing: “You treat one Person the same as you would do yourself.” Everybody believe in Paradise, as they also call it Heaven. We all believe in something, and some believe in Nothing. It is more of a Choice. I would talk to a Friend, who would just lay down on his Bed staring at the Ceiling, counting the dots…counting….and counting…oh start all over again…but never come to a Million. Always fails every time. Then he sat up, wondering why he is there at all? Then he forgot to breathe, (da dum), then wondering why am I even here at all? You see? He is full of questions. If he is so sure of himself, he would not be asking the questions at all. He is so Suicidal. Then he asked me if it was the right thing to do. I told him I am not the Person to ask and told him I am not helping in assisting him to kill himself. Then he starts babbling, worried about his Girlfriend, and another one. Don’t know which one to choose. Then he woke up, he needs to Live, so he can choose his lovely Lady. ;) He does not want to disappoint her. Ah there you go. Our Body tells us we do in fact CARE. Just like Teacher Vet and I, for one do Care about Terri.
Like Star Trek always say: “Live and Prosper.”
Peace Out ~ Jen
April 10th, 2005 at 10:13 am
HEY CULTURE OF LIFER’S
Check out an excert from this op-ed by Frank Rich.
When those leaders, led by the Bush brothers, wallow in this culture, they do a bait-and-switch and claim to be upholding John Paul’s vision of a “culture of life.” This has to be one of the biggest shams of all time. Yes, these politicians oppose abortion, but the number of abortions has in fact been going down steadily in America under both Republican and Democratic presidents since 1990 – some 40 percent in all. The same cannot be said of American infant fatalities, AIDS cases and war casualties – all up in the George W. Bush years. Meanwhile, potentially lifesaving phenomena like condom-conscious sex education and federally run stem-cell research are in shackles.
Read the whole thing…
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/opinion/10rich.html
April 11th, 2005 at 6:23 am
Jan:
These semantics are sorta bullshit. A HAND did pull the feeding tube…but what if, instead of a HAND didn’t pull the tube out. A MIND just forgot (or decided not to) refill the feeding tube’s reservoir? Would that make the action the same? Did the MIND just kill someone? So what’s the difference then? I wouldn’t call the latter killing anyone, so I extend that to the former. This is the same kind of logic that prohibits euthenasia. A HAND injects morphine into a person, killing them (peacefully). If we just…let them die (albeit painfully), it’s OK — because “God did it”, removing any personal responsibility (this is the logic behind religious terrorism as well…”it was God’s will”).
As far as why I’m even here at all, I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Are you suggesting that the only reason to live is believing in God? Without your understanding of why we’re here, is there just no point in going on? I really hope that’s not the case, because this is a sad and self-centered worldview.
You’re pretty hung up on this God thing. I’ll address it. First of all, yes. The message from most organized religion is a healthy one. However, the healthiness of the phonomena begins and ends there. Christians have fucked up Jesus’ message so much they may as well give up on it and start a new religion. “God hates fags”? Using Christianity to hate people for who they are is a bunch of hipocritical, hateful crap. Jesus should roll in his grave. Using his name for killing people? Yep, he’d be pissed about that too. I think that Allah would be pretty pissed that there are guys in the middle east are blowing people up in his name (and calling it his will). It’s a sad state of affairs. In my experience, once organized, however well intentioned, religion will be used to control, and then used as an excuse to do whatever horrible shit that it can be stretched into.
As far as having questions of our origin and purpose…sure, I have a few. I don’t necessarily believe that we have a specified purpose on this planet. As far as our origin, I do not look to metaphysical reason to answer that question…and I’m not willing to believe whatever crap the nearest organized religion is willing to shovel down my throat. The metaphysical does not make any sense, and is entirely unprovable by nature. I believe that I am here due to a sequence of pseudo-random biological events and that’s that. To being it back into context, I do not think that belief on God prevents suicide, and I don’t believe that those who lack belief in God are more prone to suicide. There are other factors that drive people to taking their life, and these are mostly psychological in nature.
Anyway, I can go on and on and on with my anti-religious cynacism, but I’ll stop just after saying that I do not believe in good and evil in the traditional and absolute black-and-white sense. However, that which purports to know the difference between absolute good and evil is absolutely frightening and harmful to us all.
April 11th, 2005 at 6:41 am
Marilyn Manson said it best with regards to religion…
“Some of the things that these relgious people do and say to me are probably the most un-relgious things that anyone could ever think of.”
April 11th, 2005 at 10:07 pm
TeacherVet wants to know why Terri Schiavo didn’t have an MRI. Well as it happens, it’s because of experimental implants her evil abusive husband had put in to try to stimulate her brain function. This, along with years of experimental and conventional therapies, was tried by that modern-day Mengele, Michael Schiavo, who also went to nursing school to try to learn how to take care of his wife. What a monster!
I think what angers me the most about this case is people throwing around falsehoods without knowing the facts.
April 13th, 2005 at 7:22 pm
Michael Schiavo was told to have the implants removed…by the doctor who implanted them. They could have been removed at any time, including recently, to give her an MRI and a PET scan. I think what angers me the most about this case is people throwing around falsehoods without knowing the facts.
I know what motivates me to suspect the guys actions and motivations – all rehabilitation efforts ceased immediately upon gaining the money that was ear-marked for that purpose, and he used “her” money to have her killed without complete evaluation. I don’t know what motivates people to defend his actions unless it is founded in politics.
April 14th, 2005 at 9:50 am
TeacherVet – For the one millionth time, Michael did not kill his wife. Actually, one could say she killed herself when she made the decision to purge herself, ultimatley leading to her PVS.
Killing is when an individual intentionally harms someone to the point where they are no longer alive. Like for example, the thousands that have died from that illegal war in Iraq. Or when terrorists struck the towers on 9/11. That’s what killing is.
April 14th, 2005 at 4:39 pm
Killing occurs when the actions of an individual result in the death of another. No one, including the Schiavos, have stated with certainty that Terri Schiavo was bulemic. Michael Schiavo himself has, in fact, stated that he never saw evidence to support the contention, but that “some people” have theorized that bulemia might have been the cause of her original heart attack and collapse, but it has never been certified as fact. The pro-death community has taken that ball and run with it, and many have assumed it was factual; after all, it was reported in “the news,” so it must be true.
I’m still confused by the use of the word “illegal ” with regard to the war in Iraq. At the conclusion of Desert Storm, Saddam Hussein made promises to the world, then: he violated almost all of his agreements; he executed many thousands of Kurds; he ignored U.N. mandates; he thwarted attempts by U.N. inspection teams; he made numerous attempts to shoot down our planes over several years time; every nation in the world acknowledged that he maintained an illegal weapons program; Congress passed a war resolution; a huge coalition of countries joined the effort. Where is the illegality?
Is it illegal because the Oil for Palaces profiteering countries failed to support efforts to enforce U.N. resolutions, or because thirty-some countries choose to join the coalition to enforce those resolutions during a Republican administration? Is it illegal because the WMD, the existence of which was certain throughout the world, was never found? Was it illegal because intelligence sources haven’t been proven true? The term has become a meaningless mantra, even a cliche, through repetition.
April 14th, 2005 at 7:10 pm
Funny, TeacherVet, you seem to agree with Michael Shiavos’ ‘statements’ when they suit your agenda. But when they dont you over and over call him a lying SOB. So which is it?
You have lost all credibility.
April 14th, 2005 at 7:16 pm
Oh, btw invading a sovereign nation that poses no threat to you is illegal. No WMD, no connection bin laden yadayadayada. 30 countries for it, couple hundred against it. Thousands dead.
Illegal. Immoral. Period.
April 14th, 2005 at 9:07 pm
I used a quote from Michael Schiavo because you seem to find him credible. I have never used the phrase “lying SOB,” but I still contend that he is a hate-filled, cruel SOB. Of course, you may be right – he’s probably a really nice guy and a great husband; no evidence of any faults.
Saddam Hussein’s attempts to shoot down our aircraft constituted a threat to us, and he posed a constant threat to our friends in the area by financing suicide bombers; that made him a terrorist, and we declared war against all terrorism. No WMD found. Connections? Please refer to the findings of the 9/11 Commission – their report detailed several connections to terrorist activities. Who are the couple hundred countries who were afraid to enforce the U.N. resolutions against Saddam’s regime (besides the obvious three profiteering nations)?
Illegal implies the breaking of laws. I don’t know which laws were broken, but all four wars of the 1990s must also have been illegal – or am I simply unaware of the threat posed by Kosovo (still, by the way, a cesspool of ethnic cleansing) and the other nations we invaded in that decade.
And, oh my God, you mean people get killed in war?!
April 15th, 2005 at 12:06 pm
Say whatever makes you feel better, TecherVet. But the fact is, when a country invades another under this retarded guise of ‘pre-emptiveness’, it’s illegal.
Just like when Iraq invaded Kuwait, this too is an illegal war.
April 15th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
Oh yeah, your Pope called this war illegal as well.
April 15th, 2005 at 1:44 pm
We “legally” responded to the Iraq invasion of Kuwait, and the present conflict is merely an extension of that response. I know you will reject that, but only because it doesn’t fit your argument.
I associate with only one Catholic, and he is a rather detestable man. I have personal family reasons for my distaste for the Catholic church, and John Paul was certainly not my pope. I’m not even as religious as you assume (meaning that I am not as involved in church activities as I should be), although my arguments might lend themselves to that conclusion – I have always argued only that the right to believe and worship, free of persecution, is Constitutionally protected by the First Amendment.
You posted a reaction, but I have still received no response to my post. I fully supported the four wars under Bill Clinton because of humanitarian considerations. They (the four wars of the 90s) could all be defined as pre-emptive, the ultimate goals were essentially the same, and none of those countries represented an immediate threat to the U.S. Based on your criteria, those conflicts were equally illegal…but, in my opinion, necessary.
April 15th, 2005 at 4:40 pm
Wait, let me get this straight…so Saddam Hussein indirectly attacked Terri Schaivo by financing terr’asts, which was justification for a pre-emptive killing of the Pope?
While I’m at it, let’s clear something else up: Are the pro-death people for or against the war? What about those other four wars?
This aggression will not stand, man!
April 15th, 2005 at 6:45 pm
My mother had a red sweater once.
April 20th, 2005 at 6:27 am
I am pro-death when someone is so retarded that they cannot function and cannot live without the help of man or machine. I have heard numerous people say those exact words, “I would never want to live like that.” That was even before this whole fiasco.
I am NOT pro death when someone is sitting at their kitchen table eating supper with thier children when a 20 000 LB bomb lands on the diner table.
The good thing about all this is that it damaged the presidents approval ratings and the republican party in general. So yay!!
June 15th, 2005 at 9:59 am
From CNN, NBC, ABC and yes, even Fox…
An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband’s contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner’s office said today. The autopsy also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused.
Well well well what do you to say now, TeacherVet????
January 16th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
Definition Euthanasia
“The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.”
I feel that Euthanasia should be a choice. …