Posted on 03/29/2005 8:58:34 AM PST by Long Cut
What you saw was a cleverly edited tape.
So if the Schindlers had been more media savvy in picking their spokesmen, then you opinion might have been different???
no and you know that is not what i mean. i have said the presumption should always be for life. obviously if one makes one's wishes clear, there would be no need of a presumption.
You know this to be a fact?
There are actually several criteria. No way President Bush would sign a bill that does what CNN and MSM say it does.
I will try to find the bill....
Right. I've read about 20 articles on this very thing for the past week. All concur.
Me eyes are screaming, "Enough already!"
I meant I just cannot believe the family would do that.
And I don't know what I think anymore, except that I don't want this going on if I should end up like her; my husband gets to decide.
More propaganda. Look at the ADA definition of disabled. You aren't keeping up your end of the manifesto.
I used to live in Boulder City......loved it
I was told that he didn't sign the original bill, right?
You are wrong. How can you even make a comparison between the two conditions? Being mentally challenged is 100% better than being brain dead.
sw
I don't want it to be true and I don't wish her dead, but to my mind she is dead. You have to know that a person who is so severely damaged is never going to get better. She didn't respond to intensive therapy after four years.
I worked at a board and care for folks like her. It was tragic the lengths and expense that the families went to to keep these poor bodies alive.
My opinion about what?
The entire case.
A wife w/children.
A mistress w/a child.
Same thing they accuse Michael Schivao of having.
Schindlers speak out of both sides of mouth.
Nice straw man, sink.
I believe you can be for life....AND for supporting the current laws.
Example: I am against abortion. But, because that is the law of the land, I must support that law. That doesn't mean I agree with the law. But were I to advocate anarchy (perhaps the violent overthrow of abortion clinics), I would be wrong.
I can HATE the law...but not castigate people who are for supporting current laws.
One can be FOR life.....and also for the law, imo. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.
you discredit yourself by your responses to me. YOU are responsible for yourself, i don't know you or what you believe. i meant YOU as in ONE, ONE is either for life or ONE is not. i am not speaking to you personally, other than to say that i cannot make you understand something that is obvious to so many yet you seem unable to grasp. you are attempting to cast this as me attacking you and i am not. i see lots of bandwith expended on judging other freepers for their reactions to this tragedy, all while moaning about names and aspersions cast on them. EACH should look to their own behavior and examine it with a critical eye.
I'm not as willing as you are to believe that the misrepresentation is the result of raw nerves or muddy thoughts. Based upon the pattern that has developed here at SchiavoRepublic, I'm pretty confident that they are intentionally lying about the Court's action.
Go ahead and postulate your acceptable minimum level of getting better. What level of function would be acceptable to you for someone to be permitted to live in this situation, please?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.