Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
and vice versa. you've IGNORED any rationale i've put into it because of YOUR beliefs. so we'll be two 'closed minded' individuals who think everyones wrong and we're right.Bonnie said:There's no point in discussing this with you as in your mind the husbands word is law and everyone else is just wrong.....So that's that! The husband says she wants to die, so starve her to death, end of discussion........This is futile, you ignore any rational argument to the contrary...
If you're referring to me and my wife, yes....as painful as it would be to me(and her) I would stand by her wishes because I love her that much. Anything else would be pure selfishness.Bonnie said:Just one more question for you..........Could you be the one to pull the plug and watch her die??
ReillyT said:This is basic Separation of Powers stuff. The people make the laws, not decisions about how the laws are applied. This isn't activist judging. The judge is applying the laws of Florida in the proper manner and weighing the evidence as a judge is supposed to do.
Why don't we just get rid of the judges and you can form a committee to make all of these decisions for us.
SmarterThanYou said:If you're referring to me and my wife, yes....as painful as it would be to me(and her) I would stand by her wishes because I love her that much. Anything else would be pure selfishness.
don't even try that. you're taking a simple question and adding a whole scenario to it that wasn't even asked of me.Avatar4321 said:So you are saying that without any effort to try to rehabilitate you you would starve your wife to death, not even allowing her to try to learn to eat on her own so you could keep her settlement money and marry your mistress?
Gem said:ReillyT,
The court decision was based upon a diagnosis of PVS (Persitive Vegetative State). The doctor who made that diagnosis spent less than an hour with Terri Schiavo and has made his career on right-to-death cases. He has supported the starvation of people who could feed themselves, people who could operate wheelchairs, people who could interact meaningfully will people around him...his agenda is obvious and makes him an incredibly biased witness in this case.
The court decision was based upon his diagnosis and the tests that were done. However, numerous neurologists in sworn afidavits have testified to the fact that diagnosing PVS without certain tests like an MRI (which hasn't been done in Terri Shiavo's case) would be "criminal."
In any criminal case, people would be SCREECHING about lack of due process if a criminal was convicted under similar circumstances (an incredibly biased witness and lack of proper tests and measures to discern the truth).
Terri Shiavo has the right to have all of the evidence examined by unbiased sources...and if, in the end, it is demonstrated that she is, indeed PVS, and she did, indeed not want to live that way, then I am in full support of a medically supervised death. Although I would much rather have them simply inject her with something that would kill her quickly and painlessly, rather than a lengthy and painful death by dehydration and starvation.
Bonnie said:The whole reason congress is acting in this case is they believe the courts are not listening to the whole case.
Avatar4321 said:So you are saying that without any effort to try to rehabilitate you you would starve your wife to death, not even allowing her to try to learn to eat on her own so you could keep her settlement money and marry your mistress?
I think that it should. Serious decisions like that should be left to me and no one else. Of course I'm not married.SmarterThanYou said:because of this issue, what is happening is now you're removing spousal responsibility......forever. will the same apply in all medical situations?
I don't really consider that an intrusion. It's a limitation. Only you have the right to make these types of decisions about your life. Personal responsibility. I think that's a good thing.STY said:again, what you're now advocating is removing spousal responsibility and forcing the government to intrude on the marriage sacrament by requiring legal and notarized documentation for ones final wishes.
I agree. If we, as a society (because this reflects on us all), are going to execute this woman, let us at least do it as painlessly as possible.ScreamingEagle said:If the "logical" Court is going to order them to kill her, why can't the Court issue the order to kill her humanely? I'm sure it was not her wish to die in great pain. That certainly is not following her wishes.
so when you get married we can expect you to make out a living will based on every conceivable incident with appropriate contingencies in case you're incapacitated and can't inform doctors, lawyers, judges, or politicians what you're wishes would be. I can see where it would benefit your spouse and keep her from having to make such an important decision concerning your welfare and/or well-being.Zhukov said:I think that it should. Serious decisions like that should be left to me and no one else. Of course I'm not married.
I'm surprised though. I would think in our litigious-happy society hospitals wouldn't feel comfortable relying on the word of a spouse.I don't really consider that an intrusion. It's a limitation. Only you have the right to make these types of decisions about your life. Personal responsibility. I think that's a good thing.
are you currently writing your representative to overturn the assisted suicide law?Zhukov said:I agree. If we, as a society (because this reflects on us all), are going to execute this woman, let us at least do it as painlessly as possible.
I mean, starving her to death? That's just barbaric. One couldn't even do that to their cat or dog.
SmarterThanYou said:are you currently writing your representative to overturn the assisted suicide law?
If one existed, maybe. Logically, one could surmise that, knowing theres no assisted suicide, a 10 day death is preferable to 10-20 years of a less than crappy quality of life.ScreamingEagle said:Not sure I am following you here.
Since Terri's wishes are not in writing, the Court's been basing their decision on the husband's secondary report of Terri's wishes. My point being that if the Court decided that the husband knew his wife's wishes, wouldn't her wishes logically include a humane way to die?
Not when assisted suicide is against the law. THAT would be murder.ScreamingEagle said:Are you saying that assisted suicide in Florida cannot be done humanely with a shot of something? Assuming that it is in writing and/or the patient's wish?
nope, I wrote long ago to pass it. Here in texas, though, the republican politicians don't pay much attention to anything that goes against their beliefs or party when they are in a huge majority.no1tovote4 said:Wrote that long ago, has it taken you this long to do so?
SmarterThanYou said:Not when assisted suicide is against the law. THAT would be murder.
i know it sucks. I don't like it one bit. is a week of starvation/dehydration better than languishing in a bed for the rest of your life unable to do anything but breathe?ScreamingEagle said:You're right. http://www.religioustolerance.org/euth_us2.htm#fl
Big difference, huh? (being facetious)
SmarterThanYou said:i know it sucks. I don't like it one bit. is a week of starvation/dehydration better than languishing in a bed for the rest of your life unable to do anything but breathe?
God gives us that which makes us stronger, but only on a mental/emotional/spiritual basis.ScreamingEagle said:I shudder to think of it but on the other hand, does God give us anything that we cannot bear?
If you're referring to the case of a couple months ago, that is totally different. That woman woke up from a coma, not severe brain damage.ScreamingEagle said:If Terri is brain-dead, then is she truely suffering? What if she was able to wake up someday? It's happened before.
SmarterThanYou said:If you're referring to the case of a couple months ago, that is totally different. That woman woke up from a coma, not severe brain damage.
