Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Freep this Poll: Was it right for the judge to allow Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be removed?
USA Today ^ | 10/15/03 | USA Today

Posted on 10/15/2003 2:45:35 PM PDT by Skooz

Edited on 04/13/2004 1:41:16 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-85 last
To: Servant of the 9
She has been no more alive than a turnip for over ten years

Have you gone to the website and seen the clips of this so-called "turnip" sitting up and smiling and moving her eyes in response to commands?

51 posted on 10/16/2003 12:03:13 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
Forced Feeding is a form of life support.

Really? Its no differnet than nursing a helpless baby. But I dare not ask your views on such "burdens" to families.

52 posted on 10/16/2003 12:05:31 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
It was her choice. There is zero evidence to the contrary, or one of the many courts to hear this matter would have replaced her husband with another guardian. Gossip and rumor are not evidence.

So9

53 posted on 10/16/2003 12:36:21 PM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
There is zero evidence to the contrary

Actually there is zero evidence that she wanted this. It was the word of her parents and everyone who knew her well verses the word of her abusive husband who has everything to gain and nothing to lose by her death.

54 posted on 10/16/2003 1:10:48 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
In the interest of our respective taglines, are your views fully consistent with Barry Goldwater? Goldwater was an overt and avid supporter of Planned Parenthood later in his career. (IIRC, his wife was an officer in that group.)

Can you tell me if his views were also consistent with that organ's beginnings in eugenics and racism under Margaret Sanger? For the record, how much of their earliest thinking remains with you?
55 posted on 10/16/2003 3:09:23 PM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
We are witnessing murder on an innocent woman before our eyes. Where is Susan Sarrandon?
56 posted on 10/16/2003 3:11:48 PM PDT by ladyinred (Talk about a revolution, look at California!!! We dumped Davis!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
10/16/2003 - Updated 05:11:42 PM ET
Quick question results
 
Was it right for the judge to allow Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be removed?

 52.49%
No

 47.51%
Yes
Total Votes:11388

57 posted on 10/16/2003 3:13:34 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: genefromjersey
**I took the time to vote YES !!**

Gene,
We will take the time to pray for you. Only God can control life.

Pro-life bump!
58 posted on 10/16/2003 3:15:03 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: genefromjersey
**I took the time to vote YES !!**

Gene,
We will take the time to pray for you. Only God can control life.

This is murder!!

Pro-life bump!
59 posted on 10/16/2003 3:15:27 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
52% no

47% yes

They've been overtaken
60 posted on 10/16/2003 3:15:38 PM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (If you continue to do what you've always done, you will continue to get what you've always got)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Is anyone interested in the executioner's e-mail address?  Let him know your opinion:

ggreer@co.pinellas.fl.us

 

61 posted on 10/16/2003 3:16:05 PM PDT by hardhead (Vast Right Wing Conspirator, Serial Number 565723890)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
**It was her choice.**

Do you actually believe the wishes of her money grabbing greedy husband??

Over her parents?

It is not her choice.

Prayers for Terri and prayers for you.

Pro-life NOT pro-murder bump!
62 posted on 10/16/2003 3:17:47 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Pro-life NOT pro-murder bump!

Another sad sign of the Bambification of the Republican party. It has become almost as preposterous as PETA.

SO9

63 posted on 10/16/2003 3:31:22 PM PDT by Servant of the 9 (Think of it as Evolution In Action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
>> "Was it right for the judge to allow Terri Schiavo's feeding tube be removed?"

[yes]

[no] <<

The poll is carefully worded and physically positioned to get "yes" votes. People always want to do what's right. Here, unless you read carefully, "WAS IT RIGHT" was the question and the "yes" -- positioned on top -- was the quick, instinctive, nice answer.

The question also diverted the real substance of the question (should Terri Schiavo be starved to death) to the trivial question of what "the judge" should "allow." Again, of course we presume the judge will do the right thing.

Had the question been phrased, "Was it wrong...," respondents would at least have had to think harder.

Had the question dropped the whole "right/wrong" wording and found more nearly neutral phrasing (not easy, to be sure), the vote should have reflected traditional American decency, generosity and moral values. It would have overwhelmingly rejected killing Terri Schiavo.

We Americans have always helped the poor, disabled and helpless. When someone is hurt, we pour out our hearts and money. When there is natural disaster in some foreign land, we send aid, and we do it by airlift. If someone is hungry, we feed him. If many are hungry, we set up soup kitchens and feed them all.

My daughter, a special ed teacher, has devoted her life to helping profoundly handicapped kids. Most of the children have had no hope of a normal life, but she helps anyway. We all would. We do NOT execute the weak and sick and hurt among us because they're inconvenient.

64 posted on 10/16/2003 3:54:29 PM PDT by T'wit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Freeped and bumped.

I also emailed Fox because its newreaders have used the word "coma" all day long!

Leni

65 posted on 10/16/2003 4:00:49 PM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
Your ignorance of this particular situation is total, complete and absolute.

This is not a "right to die" case. This is murder being committed by a husband via the apparatus of the state.

66 posted on 10/16/2003 5:11:25 PM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Skooz; *Catholic_list
From a search of The Catechism of the Catholic Church (first 40 references on life

2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.


2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.


336 From its beginning until death, human life is surrounded by their watchful care and intercession. "Beside each believer stands an angel as protector and shepherd leading him to life." Already here on earth the Christian life shares by faith in the blessed company of angels and men united in God.


2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God. "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."


1524 In addition to the Anointing of the Sick, the Church offers those who are about to leave this life the Eucharist as viaticum. Communion in the body and blood of Christ, received at this moment of "passing over" to the Father, has a particular significance and importance. It is the seed of eternal life and the power of resurrection, according to the words of the Lord: "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." The sacrament of Christ once dead and now risen, the Eucharist is here the sacrament of passing over from death to life, from this world to the Father.


» Enter the CCC at this paragraph

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."


2288 Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.

Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.


1007 Death is the end of earthly life. Our lives are measured by time, in the course of which we change, grow old and, as with all living beings on earth, death seems like the normal end of life. That aspect of death lends urgency to our lives: remembering our mortality helps us realize that we have only a limited time in which to bring our lives to fulfillment:

Remember also your Creator in the days of your youth, . . . before the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.


1641 "By reason of their state in life and of their order, [Christian spouses] have their own special gifts in the People of God." This grace proper to the sacrament of Matrimony is intended to perfect the couple's love and to strengthen their indissoluble unity. By this grace they "help one another to attain holiness in their married life and in welcoming and educating their children."




67 posted on 10/16/2003 5:12:29 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
This is not a "right to die" case. This is murder being committed by a husband via the apparatus of the state.

I can say the same of you

Do you have any proof, not gossip or hearsay, but proof to go with your accusation of murder?

So9

68 posted on 10/16/2003 5:54:10 PM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Avoiding_Sulla
I just voted; percentages are still about the same.
69 posted on 10/16/2003 7:06:12 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: All

Click HERE for RadioFR Website!

Tonight, UNSPUN with AnnaZ and Guest Hostess DIOTIMA!

October 16th, 2003 -- 10pmE/7pmP

featuring an Interview with
Victor Davis Hanson
Author of “Mexifornia”

Click HERE to LISTEN LIVE while you FReep!

Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!


70 posted on 10/16/2003 7:06:37 PM PDT by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
This court order does come as a surprise. Remember that the Congress had to pass a LAW that said if a baby is BORN, it HAS A RIGHT TO LIVE!

During the public hearings on this legislation, a nurse (under oath, if that means anything to the pimps of the election industry)told how she was assisting in a Partial Birth Abortion and inadvertantly the baby popped out. She was ordered to let the baby lie there and NOT TO ASSIST IT!

This seems very similar.
71 posted on 10/16/2003 7:12:44 PM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan; Skooz
Note the failure to respond to number 55 and then use that to consider with whom you are in dispute.
72 posted on 10/16/2003 9:29:30 PM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
Well, with over 11000 votes, it does take a lot to move the percentages now. And the ghouls seems to have abated their voting here and are now probably calling Governor Bush to discourage his intervention.

If you wish to counter their efforts with your own, here's the thread with the info for calling Jeb. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1002344/posts
73 posted on 10/16/2003 9:39:12 PM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
You want "proof?" Can you provide "proof" for your assertion that this is what she wants?

Of course you can't. Your ignorance to this case is further demonstrated every time you post.

This is a knee-jerk "right to die" response on your part. You choose to remain ignorant of the facts in this case.
74 posted on 10/17/2003 5:12:45 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Can you provide "proof" for your assertion that this is what she wants?

Not necessary in the American Judicial System.

The husband is presumed innocent unless you have evidence to the contrary. He does not have to prove it.

The husband is presumed to be testifying truthfully about her wishes, unless impeached by evidence that he lies.

The entire onus of proof is on those who dispute his legal right to carry out his wifes wishes.

So9

75 posted on 10/17/2003 7:37:15 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
You earlier stated that this woman wishes to die. You provided no proof. Do have any?

You later required proof for the assertions of myself and others that her husband wishes her to die. You demand proof from others, but refuse to provide any for your statements.

I have no "proof," for my assertions, just overwhelming circumstantial evidence. Your position lacks even that.
76 posted on 10/17/2003 7:56:05 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
You earlier stated that this woman wishes to die. You provided no proof. Do have any?

Absent any proof of dishonesty capable of impeaching the husbands testimony, his word is all the proof our legal system requires.

You later required proof for the assertions of myself and others that her husband wishes her to die. You demand proof from others, but refuse to provide any for your statements.

I have no "proof," for my assertions, just overwhelming circumstantial evidence. Your position lacks even that.

Obviously your circumstantial evidence was not found to be overwhelming by a court of competent jurisdiction.

My position requires no proof other than the husbands word. In our system his word is true unless proven false.

So9

77 posted on 10/17/2003 8:03:27 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
You are missing the entire point.

This woman was not being kept alive by extraordinary means.

She was/is NOT in a coma.

She was/is NOT terminal.

She is being slowly starved to death by removal of a feeding tube.
78 posted on 10/17/2003 8:07:17 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
You are missing the entire point.

This woman was not being kept alive by extraordinary means.
She was/is NOT in a coma.
She was/is NOT terminal.
She is being slowly starved to death by removal of a feeding tube.

I am not missing the point, you are.
If the woman cannot speak coherently for herself, then her husband has that right.
If you don't like the law, work to change it, but don't bitch about it being fairly enforced.
And it is being fairly enforced.

So9

79 posted on 10/17/2003 8:21:25 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
She is not being allowed to die.

She is being killed.
80 posted on 10/17/2003 8:27:34 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
She is not being allowed to die.
She is being killed.

This is the same argument as the Abortion fight.

Acording to the laws of the United States, abortion is not murder.
Acording to the laws of the United States, this woman is being allowed to die, not being kiled.
If you do not agree, work to change the laws, that is the Conservative way.
Don't whine and ask Jeb Bush for a special exception, that is the Liberal way.

So9

81 posted on 10/17/2003 9:00:14 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
If you read the Jeb Bush Amicus brief filed with the federal court, Judge Lazzara, you see that the governor took the position that Terri's Constitutional rights were being violated, the federal judge refused to hear the case and remanded it back to judge 'killum' Greer, who has refused to allow Terri the opportunity to show she can take in food and liquid by mouth! What is gripping my gut is the disconnect between Jeb arguing her rights are being violated (and the federal judge merely passed the buck, without ruling on the amicus aregument) then not acting to see that the violation stops beofre it kills Terri!
82 posted on 10/17/2003 9:14:36 AM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
This is the same argument as the Abortion fight.

Nonsense.

It is a simple staement of fact. Terri is not being kept alive by machines.

Regardless of where on stands on the "right to die" issue, the matter is almost always one of the patient being kept alive artificially by machines. If the machines are unplugged, the patient dies, long before the person would starve to death.

In this case, the patient is living on her own, without the help of machines. She is being killed by removal of her food supply.

Enormous (and quite obvious) difference.

83 posted on 10/17/2003 10:37:00 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
She is being killed by removal of her food supply

Nonsense. She is free to eat at any time.
The feeding tube (a machine, albeit a simple one) is all that is being removed.

So9

84 posted on 10/17/2003 11:16:22 AM PDT by Servant of the 9 (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9
Exactly. Her food supply has been removed. She will starve to death.

A newborn cannot feed himself, either.
85 posted on 10/17/2003 11:24:05 AM PDT by Skooz (All Hail the Mighty Kansas City Chiefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-85 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson