Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
Love your word choice. Parents have been begging the courts for years to please let them take care of their kid, saying that hubby wasn't doing what he should. Courts kept saying, no, go away, he's acting in her best interests. They keep trying. Nope. Now, hubby says, kill her, it's time. Parents STILL say, let us take care of her, please. Courts say, nope, hubby's her boss, not you. Go away while we kill your daughter.

I'm not arguing that she's coming back, nor that the fed action was right. Just that this has been a horrid example of merciless proper procedure over humanity.

And you leave the parents right out of your either/or choice.

(And seemingly forget that almost 50% of the Dems who voted, voted for the bill, too.)

The court decided what she wanted. Not what her husband wanted. Not what her parents wanted. Not what that lying, ass-fucked piece of shit Tom Delay wanted (don't get mad at me, Bilmore, he's the one who decided to make it about him).

Thec ourt found that, based on the best evidence, she would not want to be maintained in a persistent vegetative state. The courts of Florida found that to be the case. The federal courts were persuaded that was her wish.

The rest of use should all stay the fuck out of it. You keep making it about her husband v. her parents. It's about what she wanted.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
There are no good choices for her -- death, or lingering in a vegetative state. Reasonable people can differ about which they'd choose, but reasonable people admit that it's a tough choice. By denigrating the moral choice that Michael Schiavo has made to, "kill her," you make clear how reasonable you are about it. It's not just a question of process. It's not a question of procedure over humanity. Many of us look at what the parents have done and have a hard time seeing it as humane. I have a hard time criticizing them, since they've lost and are again losing a daughter. So I'll save my criticism for all of those looking to score cheap points out of their tragedy.

I left the parents out because a respect for the sanctity of marriage means more than lip service -- it means that the husband has rights the parents don't. I also left out her friends and other relatives. They are surely hurt by what's happening to her, but that doesn't mean they get to substitute their beliefs for her husbands, either.

I can imagine a situation in which Schiavo's parents wanted to let her die, and her husband didn't, and the cultural conservatives side with him and trashed them. They don't care about the marriage here -- other things are more important.

And I haven't forgotten the Dems who voted for the bill. What do you want me to say about them?

You, too are missing the point. The court decided what Terri's wishes were. I repeat, what TERRI'S wishes were.

If people would stop ignoring that fact, this whole thing could just die and be buried. Like Terri.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
This may, in fact, be key to my view of the matter. Sushi doesn't have interests. Any "dignity" or "wishes" kinds of interests all reside in the survivors who hold those interests dear, or not.

So then, if I get this correctly, people have rights, the brain dead are chattel? Now that is an enlightened position.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
I think they approach irrelevancy due to her vegatative qualities, in relation to the interests of the living.

And that confirms my earlier thoughts. As if there could really have been any doubt after you referred to her as "sushi." Tell, Bilmore, at what point in the life cycle do we cease to have rights?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Even you must see this is a critical difference. You do see it don't you?

It would be a difference if the court had found that Michael Schiavo wantd her to die instead of him finding that she did not want to be kept in a persistent vegetative state.

[Free Terri!]

Originally posted by taxwonk
The court decided what Terri's wishes were.
.

Exactly, the corrupt incompetent deathwhore greer decided, based on incomplete evidence and hearsay to substitute his amorality for the true wishes of someone who never communicated them.

Greer seems like a bloodthirsty savage, hellbent on executing this poor young woman with no due process for her at all.

And thus we are left with the "order" of the imperial judiciary.

Well, when it comes time to pay the piper, "orders" don't always hold as a defense in the face of what everyone knows is the truly righteous moral position. The excuse of just following "orders" was not too convincing to those who presided over the Nuremberg tribunals and it will be found to be just as as morally void by He who judges Greer, Felos, Schiavo and there accomplices when that righteous Day of Judgment comes.

In the meantime it seems as if 10 year old children have more courage of their morality than Jeb Bush, the pontious pilate of this passionate play.

the Modern Day Mark 15:12-15 would read:

12 "What shall I do, then, with the one you call Terri Schiavo?" Jeb Bush asked them.

13 "Starve her!" the Imperial leftwing Judiciary ordered.

14 "Why? She is an innocent helpless life?" asked Bush.

But the Imperial Judiciary, bolstered by the support of its leftwingdeathcult and media allies, ordered again and again and again, all the more emphatically, "Starve her to death!"

15 Wanting to appease the Imperial Judiciary, Bush abdicated his authority to save Terri. He stood by, actionless, as the Judiciary had Terri starved and dehydrated.

[Spanky]

What I don't get about the trial court's decision is if there is any doubt shouldn't you err on the side of life? If she didn't write down her wishes, then the fact that she wanted to die comes from hearsay. And this type of decision is important enough that it should be written down, otherwise you can't be sure that the person that made such a decisions gave it much thought. Certain agreements have to be reduced to writing to be valid because they are so important - this seems to me to fall into that catagory. If you err on the side of life you can always change that decision if further evidence arises. But if you choose death, if further evidence arises you can't go back. And why is her husband spending so much time and energy getting her put under? If she is a vegatable and can't feel a thing (if starving to death doesn't cause her pain) then clearly living won't cause her pain. Especially when her family is so dead against it.


On another note, as Free Terri demonstrates, the Evangelicals are a fickle mistress. Jeb and the rest of the Republicans whipped them up and now the beast has turned on them. I don't think Jeb saw this coming. I think Jeb figured he could reap tons of political capital (money and precinct walkers) for his stand on this. I think that Jeb knew that the courts would overule him and so he had nothing to lose. I think once the courts had made their decision Jeb thought that the evangelicals would think he had done all he could. He didn't think they would want him to break the law. As a moderate Republican I can tell you once the Evangelicals direct their hate at you all reason is lost. After primaries they get so angry when the moderate Republican wins that the take the moderate down in the general so the democrat can win. They do this out of pure spite and emotion. They did that to Brooks Firestone in Santa Barbara. Jeb pissed of the majority by getting involved and now he has pissed off his base by not going all the way. The evangelicals hate half measure more than no measures.

[Free Terri!]

Originally posted by Spanky
He didn't think they would want him to break the law.

regardless of your blasphemously derogatory view of people of faith, who far outnumber the unfaithful, I will respond and note that it was Tom Jefferson who said, "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."

The people don't seek to have Jeb break the law, rather to uphold the legitimate object of government. he had the power he abdicated. A wimp. Much like his dad. Thankfullly that gene skipped over W.

And it looks like the end is near for Terri. According to reports they have started to administer morphine. I guess morphine is necessary due to the painless humane form of execution that Greer, Felos and the Adulterer are using. Why not a bullet to the head?

based on this picture, starvation does look to be humane:



The mouth would dry out and become caked or coated with thick material.
The lips would become parched and cracked.
The tongue would swell, and might crack.
The eyes would recede back into their orbits and the cheeks would become hollow.
The lining of the nose might crack and cause the nose to bleed.
The skin would hang loose on the body and become dry and scaly.
The urine would become highly concentrated, leading to burning of the bladder.
The lining of the stomach would dry out and the sufferer would experience dry
heaves and vomiting.
The body temperature would become very high.
The brain cells would dry out, causing convulsions.
The respiratory tract would dry out, and the thick secretions that would
result could plug the lungs and cause death.
At some point within five days to three weeks the major organs, including the
lungs, heart, and brain, would give out and the patient would die.
Brophy v. New England Sinai Hosp., 398 Mass. 417, 444 n.2, 497 N.E.2d 626

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Even you must see this is a critical difference. You do see it don't you?

You're saying you don't believe the evidence about what Schiavo wanted, whereas the reporter believed what the DeLays said?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Free Terri!
regardless of your blasphemously derogatory view of people of faith, who far outnumber the unfaithful,

I have never been derogatory against people of faith. I have just been deragatory of people like you. You do not represent all people of faith. As a Christian, and a person of faith, I can tell you that you do not represent me. Generally, I prefer that people who represent me to know the definitions of the words they are using. I know it is fun to use "big words" but you should really consult a dictionary before doing so.

Originally posted by Free Terri!
I will respond and note that it was Tom Jefferson who said, "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."

Thomsa Jefferson, who you like to quote, was a Deist and not a Christian. He thought most of the New Testament was mythology and created his own Bible (often referred to as the Jefferson bible) that deleted all references he thought were untrue - including the Virgin Birth, the Healings, the Resurrection. John Adams and Alexander Hamilton both thought that Jefferson was really an atheist, and for that reason, they thought he was unfit to be President. Jefferson was not an Atheist or Agnostic, he did believe in God, but he believed in the Deist watchmaker theory - God created the universe but after he did so he does not interfere at all with his creation. Jefferson thought there was no evidence to support that God was involed in our lives. Just thought you should know you were quoting a blasphemer.

Originally posted by Free Terri!
The people don't seek to have Jeb break the law, rather to uphold the legitimate object of government. he had the power he abdicated. A wimp. Much like his dad. Thankfullly that gene skipped over W.

You may think that is the legimate act of government, but if you want him to ignore a federal or state court order, he would be breaking the law. He may not be breaking God's law, but he would be breaking the law of the Country. And why do you give W a pass. He could federalize the national guard and have the tube reinserted. If he really wanted to.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Spanky
What I don't get about the trial court's decision is if there is any doubt shouldn't you err on the side of life? If she didn't write down her wishes, then the fact that she wanted to die comes from hearsay.

The trial court made the finding by clear and convincing evidence. Of course, you can question what the standard of proof should be in this type of case, or in any case. But this same group of people hardly gets so anguished when a murderer is convicted based on only circumstantial evidence.

[Free Terri!]

Originally posted by Spanky
I have just been deragatory of people like you.

It’s sad to see such moral weakness in someone who has exhibited some proclivity to making sense. A rare and valuable currency in this chat group. If you don’t realize that Jeb had a duty to enforce the laws of Florida and those laws give him the authority, without prior judicial review, to go in and rescue this girl from abuse then you too have been dazed into paralytic stupidity by the cult of death of the left. Those state laws were Jeb’s to enforce, and W had to leave his baby brother to fend for himself, while he saves the other 300 million of us from the radical Islamics and the catastrophe of socialistic despair of the failed Social Security system.

Sadly, without nitpicking, this battle is over. The death and despair promoted by the democrats has won the day. I truly hope the champagne that some here will surely be sipping when Terri’s heart gives out is tinged with the bitterness of accomplicity to murder. With this battle over, the war for life will wage on. As with Dred Scott which was its generation’s Imperial Judiciary’s answer to equality for all, where the Republicans were forced to go to war to prove protect life and freedom, now when the Democrats seek to misdefine the start of life in order to support legalized killing of baby human beings, and fight to define when life ends so they can capriciously snuff it out, the Righteous Right of this once great nation will step up to the plate and do battle with Death's forces. The slope is slippery with the blood of the innocent but with the protections of the Second Amendment on our side, we will not be daunted (unlike the cowardly Bush).

And now I bid you adieu as I go to a special candlelight vigil my church is having to celebrate life and protest its disrespect in Pinellas Park, Florida. Happy Easter everyone! God bless Terri, the Schindlers, and the faithful who support them!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Free Terri!
If you don’t realize that Jeb had a duty to enforce the laws of Florida and those laws give him the authority, without prior judicial review, to go in and rescue this girl from abuse then you too have been dazed into paralytic stupidity by the cult of death of the left.

It's not abuse if she didn't want to live in a permanent vegetative state like this, Sockman, and apparently she didn't. If she had wanted to be kept alive in this state, I think we all agree that she should be, and that even a Republican government should collect more taxes to pay for it to happen.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It's not abuse if she didn't want to live in a permanent vegetative state like this, Sockman, and apparently she didn't.

Sockman told me he was done here; he was ready to leave. He wanted his spectre to leave also.

You, accusing each new GGG sock of being Sockman frustrates his wishes. First by keeping Sockman "alive" when he wants to be dead. By worse by exposing the new people to this sock as what Sockman is. I knew Sockman, and these socks are no Sockman. For the love of all that is good, please let Sockman die.

edited to let Sockman die -- t.s.
Like if P. were here he'd do like this-

Here's Bill Bubba's statue at his library

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You're saying you don't believe the evidence about what Schiavo wanted, whereas the reporter believed what the DeLays said?

There was a controvery about Schiavo since there was a conflict about what she wanted. Delay Sr.- no controversy. That is different Ty. Can you explain all the ways?