Terri

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,152015,00.html

Terri Schiavo Dies
Thursday, March 31, 2005

Terri Schiavo (search) died Thursday morning around 10 a.m. EST after her parents had plead with her husband Michael Schiavo to allow them to be at their brain-damaged daughter's bedside in her final hours, a spokesman for the family said.

Schiavo died heading into her 14th day without food and water amid what could be the final legal setback for her parents after the U.S. Supreme Court refused again to hear their plea to reinsert Schiavo's feeding tube...
 
Damn, he is an asshole. NOBODY should have to fucking plead with ANYONE to be by their childs side when they die. :(:(:(:(:(:(
 
It's appalling that in a so called progressive, "Christian" nation a spouse retains the right by state law to 'own' another human being and play God with that person's life. This case had little to do with quality of life, but more to do with WHO gets to decide when life no longer has meaning. Terri's life had meaning to her parents and brother and sister and that should have been enough. Haven't we come a long way since serfdom and the notion that women are chattels. Michael's decision to end Terri's life by depriving her of food and water is nothing but abuse; we treat lame horses more humanely.
 
bintmundo said:
It's appalling that in a so called progressive, "Christian" nation a spouse retains the right by state law to 'own' another human being and play God with that person's life. This case had little to do with quality of life, but more to do with WHO gets to decide when life no longer has meaning. Terri's life had meaning to her parents and brother and sister and that should have been enough. Haven't we come a long way since serfdom and the notion that women are chattels. Michael's decision to end Terri's life by depriving her of food and water is nothing but abuse; we treat lame horses more humanely.

Nice first post, and welcome!
 
bintmundo said:
It's appalling that in a so called progressive, "Christian" nation a spouse retains the right by state law to 'own' another human being and play God with that person's life. This case had little to do with quality of life, but more to do with WHO gets to decide when life no longer has meaning. Terri's life had meaning to her parents and brother and sister and that should have been enough. Haven't we come a long way since serfdom and the notion that women are chattels. Michael's decision to end Terri's life by depriving her of food and water is nothing but abuse; we treat lame horses more humanely.

Well...... let me say this..... we've been playing this game ever since Roe vs. Wade.....

So... I guess it was Michael's right to choose.... if you buy into the pro-choice crowd's logic.....
 
Kathianne said:

This was worse than I thought, they were prevented from seeing her:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/31/schiavo/index.html

Terri Schiavo has died
Thursday, March 31, 2005 Posted: 10:07 AM EST (1507 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Terri Schiavo, the 41-year-old brain-damaged woman who became the centerpiece of a national right-to-die battle, died Thursday morning, nearly two weeks after doctors removed the feeding tube that had sustained her for more than a decade.

Brother Paul O'Donnell, a spokesman for Bob and Mary Schindler, Schiavo's parents, said the couple was with their daughter's body and praying.

Wednesday, the Schindlers lost what their lawyer described as their "last meaningful legal appeal" in their desperate battle to have their brain-damaged daughter's feeding tube reinserted.

The U.S. Supreme Court late Wednesday refused once again to hear an emergency appeal from the Schindlers.

Their lawyer, David Gibbs, heard the high court had rejected the appeal during a news conference outside the Pinellas Park, Florida, hospice where Schiavo was receiving care.

"It appears that that will be the last meaningful legal appeal unless something comes up," Gibbs had said. "Fundamentally, the decision of the Florida courts will remain unchanged and the federal courts have declined to get involved."

Thursday morning, O' Donnell said that Schiavo was in her final hours of life, and police have prohibited her blood relatives from spending time with her.

O'Donnell, one of the family's spiritual advisers, said that her parents and siblings were "begging to be at her bedside...but are being denied."

Michael Schiavo was Terri's guardian and controlled who may visit her and when...
 
bintmundo said:
It's appalling that in a so called progressive, "Christian" nation a spouse retains the right by state law to 'own' another human being and play God with that person's life. This case had little to do with quality of life, but more to do with WHO gets to decide when life no longer has meaning. Terri's life had meaning to her parents and brother and sister and that should have been enough. Haven't we come a long way since serfdom and the notion that women are chattels. Michael's decision to end Terri's life by depriving her of food and water is nothing but abuse; we treat lame horses more humanely.

Welcome bintmundo, however, I think many, including the court, would disagree with you. Supposedly the court, not the husband, was the one who determined Terri's wishes. That's what they are claiming anyway.

But yet still unanswered is why did the Court reject the testimony of the nurse who suspected foul play by the husband which she reported to the police? Why did the court not appoint another custodian to replace the husband when it became known that he had a conflict of interest with his new relationship and children? Why did the court not investigate many questionable things and allow a federal review like any murderer would get?

Plus the very fact that the the Court decided that it is OK to starve and dehydrate a non-dying disabled person over a period of two gruesome weeks is to me plain COURT-MANDATED MURDER which is very similar to what happened in Nazi Germany where it was decided to gas tens of thousands of disabled persons because Hitler claimed them "better off dead". Very similar to what the husband claimed were Terri's wishes.
 
Welcome to an America that decides, via the judiciary, which of us are "able" and get to live, and which of us are better off starving to death. A hearty thank you to those of you who spoke up and tried to do something. The "silent" parties, or the Good Germans amongst us, should be reminded of that famous passage from history:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #14
FYI I've merged the two threads on Terri's death.

I think we now have a scary precedent in place. Terri wasn't a terminal patient. There was even evidence that she could eat on her own if she was simply given rehab. Despite this the courts orders her parents not to feed her. She died because the courts ordered it. He blood is now on the hands of the Florda and Federal Judiciary. Its on the hands of the American people. And like I said we now have a dangerous Precedent.

This is the first time that i know of that the Court has ordered the death of the handicap. I was listening to Glenn Beck talking about the culture of death in the world. We are fighting terrorists who strap bombs to their kids and send them out to die. But atleast they are fighting for something. We are murdering handicap people. There is no greater good. We simply did it because we wouldn't want to be like that. We have major problems when the extremists who want us dead are more righteous then us. Some of us are still good and just, but unless the people as a whole repent and change all of us, the good and the bad will have to suffer for it. The change has to start with ourselves though.

We are no longer a free people. We have just watched as the representatives of the people were ignored for an oligarchy of judges. When the courts can decide whether we live or die while ignoring the will of the people, we are not a free people.
 
My wife and I had a discussion about this the other night....we have both decided that food and water is not extraordinary means to keeping us alive, if we ever find ourselves in this unfortunate state.....we will be amending our living wills to specify this, accordingly.

And now some interesting technology that promises some interesting possibilities for those who are in a "vegetative" state. It may be possible to find out what is going on with their brain, and communication may be possible in the future, as this technology is advanced.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,13026,1448140,00.html

I think it is always prudent to protect the right to life rather than the right to death, unless implicitly spcified. I do think euthanasia is a viable option, but only when properly spelled out by the person who needs the relief that death can bring.
 
Avatar4321 said:
FYI I've merged the two threads on Terri's death.

I think we now have a scary precedent in place. Terri wasn't a terminal patient. There was even evidence that she could eat on her own if she was simply given rehab. Despite this the courts orders her parents not to feed her. She died because the courts ordered it. He blood is now on the hands of the Florda and Federal Judiciary. Its on the hands of the American people. And like I said we now have a dangerous Precedent.

This is the first time that i know of that the Court has ordered the death of the handicap. I was listening to Glenn Beck talking about the culture of death in the world. We are fighting terrorists who strap bombs to their kids and send them out to die. But atleast they are fighting for something. We are murdering handicap people. There is no greater good. We simply did it because we wouldn't want to be like that. We have major problems when the extremists who want us dead are more righteous then us. Some of us are still good and just, but unless the people as a whole repent and change all of us, the good and the bad will have to suffer for it. The change has to start with ourselves though.

We are no longer a free people. We have just watched as the representatives of the people were ignored for an oligarchy of judges. When the courts can decide whether we live or die while ignoring the will of the people, we are not a free people.

I wish I could rep you, but the system won't let me.... great post
 
Kathianne said:
This was worse than I thought, they were prevented from seeing her:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/31/schiavo/index.html

Isn't that sick of him Kat? You can tell by this action that he is a selfish, control freak. I hope he dies of starvation himself when it is his time to go. I cannot believe this jerk would not allow her parents to be in the room while she passed. This fucker is sick!! Period!
 
freeandfun1 said:
Isn't that sick of him Kat? You can tell by this action that he is a selfish, control freak. I hope he dies of starvation himself when it is his time to go. I cannot believe this jerk would not allow her parents to be in the room while she passed. This fucker is sick!! Period!

I seriously won't be shocked if he gets killed soon...
 
-Cp said:
I seriously won't be shocked if he doesn't get killed soon...

Me either.... I was thinking today that he better hope somebody doesn't kidnap him, put him in a cell and make him die of dehydration and starvation...
 
freeandfun1 said:
Me either.... I was thinking today that he better hope somebody doesn't kidnap him, put him in a cell and make him die of dehydration and starvation...


Yup.. just watch - I bet some of those "Montana Militiamen" will go postal and snipe him.. LOL
 

Forum List

Back
Top