|
|
Post by Exildo Wonsetler Briggs III on Apr 1, 2005 0:34:59 GMT -6
Slowly starved to death over a two-week period. I hope her snake of a husband is proud of himself. If he'd done that to a puppy, he'd be charged with animal cruelty.....Jake Jake with all due respect, your post points out the extent that lay people just have no clue what reallly goes on in our hospitals and long-term care facilities. Until rather recently in history, most everyone who didn't fall dead from a stroke or heart attack or get gored by some animal died due to STARVATION! Sick from what-ever cause, you just couldn't eat or drink enough to keep going and finally crumped. If God figured that was good enough for millions of years, I sure ain't gonna go complain to Him. I'll let you do that. I find it laughable the extent to which idiots out there say "We wouldn't starve a dog!" You're right, we'd SHOOT them to put them out of their misery. Why is it we are so "compassionate" with our dogs, but treat humans like we did Terri, rather than acknowleging she is going to die, and then making it painless and simple? She would have had a more dignified death on death row. Now THAT is SAD! .................Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Apr 1, 2005 6:24:53 GMT -6
Gordon, are you SURE you are a liberal? ;D ;D .....Jake Oh YEEAAHHH Baby!! I is fer sure... TOTALLY against capitol punishment. Life in prision with no possibility of parole is MUCH more punishing than a needle in the arm... which goes exactly to my point. Why save the best treatment for those who have done the worst crimes. The dog/cat in the vets office, the criminal on the guerney, get a LOT better treament than yanking a feeding tube. I agree with Bob's assessment, most of the billions of people who have lived over the past few million years have indeed starved to death, if they werent killed (eaten) first. Terri would have died years ago if someone had not stuffed a tube into her. BUT there is no reason, with the knowledge that she would never do anything other than exist, to require that she starve. They should have visited the nearest penitentary grabbed a fully drawn hypo, and administered a quick and painless end. I could ask for nothing better for myself. Gordon |
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Apr 1, 2005 6:28:01 GMT -6
... and for the 3 ring virus they put on for the last 2 weeks... Joe. JOE... GREAT FUCKING TYPO THERE... if indeed that is what it was... given how viruses exist... its actually very profound, obviously several glasses of wine went into the consideration of that statement. LOVE IT ;D ;D Gordon |
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on Apr 1, 2005 6:33:43 GMT -6
What really pisses me off now, are the statements that I have heard from the "supporters" of Terri. I dont know how many interviews I heard yesterday from members of the crowd there wanting the feeding tube put back in, that "now her burden has been lifted", and "now she is with her Lord", and "God will now relieve her pain". WELLL YEAH thats been the point all along!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Apr 1, 2005 8:35:42 GMT -6
JOE... GREAT FUCKING TYPO THERE... if indeed that is what it was... given how viruses exist... its actually very profound, obviously several glasses of wine went into the consideration of that statement. LOVE IT ;D ;D Gordon No wine, not one glass keys are to close together for my fingers. ;D I fixed it. And yes Gordon the parents did make a three ring circus out of it. I agree with Bob they are low lifes. Joe. |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on Apr 1, 2005 10:29:43 GMT -6
What's all this fuss I hear about Youth in Asia?.....Emily Litella
|
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Apr 1, 2005 16:53:31 GMT -6
Why save the best treatment for those who have done the worst crimes. The dog/cat in the vets office, the criminal on the guerney, get a LOT better treament than yanking a feeding tube. Gordon Ain't that the Fucking truth.  Time for this country to wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am talking about euthanisa not the death penalty .  Joe. |
|
|
|
Post by RumAndCoke on Apr 2, 2005 10:15:21 GMT -6
What's all this fuss I hear about Youth in Asia?.....Emily Litella Oh well then.................. Never mind!! |
|
|
|
Post by RumAndCoke on Apr 2, 2005 10:25:06 GMT -6
I also said that as the husband had entered a relationship with another woman he should not have retained the right to decide Terri's fate, and therefore with it who should be with her when she eventually died. Having kept that right then no, I do not think he was morally right to prevent her family being there at the end, however justified he might have felt. Whatever the parents may have done and said, as Sunlovers said in the post that I was replying to, there are two sides to every story. Simon Simon Don't confuse what you believe to be "morally right" with what "the law says". Two different categories of obligations. People are only required to do what is right under the law, not to live up to your moral standards. You can talk about what YOU would do under those conditions, but you can't enforce your moral standards on him. |
|
|
|
Post by RumAndCoke on Apr 2, 2005 10:52:06 GMT -6
Sorry Joe, but because something is widespread and normal practise does not make it acceptable, nor mean that nothing should be done to ch-ch-change it. If state sanctioned mercy killing is to be permitted then it should be carried out humanely so that people like Terri Schiavo die quick, painless and dignified deaths and not suffer the way she did. Would I let go of a loved one in Terri's condition? Yes. Would I let them die the way she did? Never. Simon Simon Have you ever even BEEN in a nursing home or a hospital or a hospice? You sound like you have a very naieve white-bread, sterilized view of natural death. How do you imagine in your head that the average person dies a natural death? Haven't you had any relatives that have died in a nursing home or anything other than a stroke or heart attack? They typically just deteriorate until they are either unwilling or unable to eat or drink. Then they just slowly fade away. Sometimes it's a couple of days, sometimes longer. Teri's was a normal, natural death. The doctors simply allowed Teri to shut down and extinguish her life on it's own schedule. To euthanize her is an act of Murder according to the law. You wouldn't find too many doctors willing to kill her in the same manner as we do our ailing pets. In a lot of the cases that I have been inolved in, with the family's consent the doctor may prescribe some sort of intervention that may aritfically hasten the natural process of death. Don't kid yourself people. It happens a lot. It's not an act of euthanasia, but a gentle nudge as the person teeters on the edge of life and death. To let her die naturally in a prolonged manner (that the ill-informed have construed for their own political purposes as painful and hungry) was the unfortunate irony that was created by the do-gooder, bleeding-heart moralists that scrutinized every action that went on in the hospice. When the Govt, local and supreme courts are involved, you are certainly not going to get a doctor in his/her right mind to put his/her actions under that kind of scrutiny to "Help" Teri along her way. The way that Teri died was natural and normal. If you think otherwise, then prepare yourself for when you are actually in that situation with a loved one. You are in for a real shock. |
|
|
|
Post by Irish Stu on Apr 2, 2005 11:06:14 GMT -6
Simon Don't confuse what you believe to be "morally right" with what "the law says". Two different categories of obligations. People are only required to do what is right under the law, not to live up to your moral standards. You can talk about what YOU would do under those conditions, but you can't enforce your moral standards on him. Why should you think I'm confused about the what I believe to be "morally right" with what "the law says"? I didn't mention the law, my comments were about what I thought Michael Schiavo should have done. Obviously I can't force my own moral standards upon the situation, though isn't that exactly what Bush and Congress attempted to do? I can though offer my own opinions, which is what I did. Simon |
|
|
|
Post by Exildo Wonsetler Briggs III on Apr 2, 2005 19:45:08 GMT -6
Make sure you have a living will. Part of the following link: I want all those people who attach themselves to my case because of their deep devotion to the sanctity of life to make death threats against any judges, elected officials or health care professionals who disagree with them. Here is my living will!  HERE! |
|
|
|
Post by DT on Apr 3, 2005 5:57:28 GMT -6
"It don't matter what one thinks the moral right is. The legal right will always prevail."  This is a quote from a IRS man. When I went and seen him about Reagans new law on claiming dependents back in 1986.  |
|
|
|
Post by Irish Stu on Apr 3, 2005 13:27:40 GMT -6
Have you ever even BEEN in a nursing home or a hospital or a hospice? You sound like you have a very naieve white-bread, sterilized view of natural death. How do you imagine in your head that the average person dies a natural death? Haven't you had any relatives that have died in a nursing home or anything other than a stroke or heart attack? As you have absolutely zero knowledge about whether I have been in nursing homes or hospices and what I may have seen and experienced you are not best placed to call my views naive, white bread and sterilised. I'm well aware that euthanasia is illegal. It is also illegal here, and yes I HAVE watched relatives die horrible slow deaths, and I wished that their misery could have been legally ended in a few seconds with a simple injection, as maybe Michael Schiavo may have wished for Terri. That is why I support the legalisation of euthanasia here in the UK, but then I'm just one of those 'ill-informed' people who dares to occasionally think there may be a better way of doing things. I didn't say it wasn't, I expressed the view that when we decide it's time to let someone in Terri's condition die then their death should be brought about more swiftly. Our 'civilized' society has the means to interfere with nature and keep people like Terri Schiavo alive, but when we decide it's time for them to die we let nature take its course. So why not let nature do its thing with those sentenced to die on death row and withdraw their food and water too? After all it would be a much more "natural and normal" way for them to die than a lethal injection. Simon |
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on Apr 3, 2005 17:55:45 GMT -6
So why not let nature do its thing with those sentenced to die on death row and withdraw their food and water too? After all it would be a much more "natural and normal" way for them to die than a lethal injection. Simon Actually that would be okay with me. Leathal injection is being nice. I firmly believe that people on death row should die the same way they killed the individual/s. If they shot some one they get shot, so forth and so on. Joe. |
|
