Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Terri a person with constitutional rights?
3/23/05 | syriacus

Posted on 03/23/2005 3:20:34 AM PST by syriacus

1. Dr. Cranford said, to Hannity last night, that PVS persons have no constitutional rights.

2. Cranford has said that Terri is PVS

Question:
Does Terri have the constitutional right to ask to be starved to death?


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: constitution; cranford; personhood; schiavo; terri; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-143 next last
If the people who want to kill Terri think she has no rights,

and

if the people who want her to live think she does have rights

Then

Which group can represent her rights?

1 posted on 03/23/2005 3:20:34 AM PST by syriacus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: syriacus
He has also written that people with Alzheimer's have no constitutional rights. He would have made a nice little Nazi.
2 posted on 03/23/2005 3:25:17 AM PST by Cagey (As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Hannity did a most excellent job at flushing this guy out and exposing him as a 'kill the useless feeders' advocate.
3 posted on 03/23/2005 3:25:19 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

So anyone know why Greer decided this guy was the only doctor whose testimony was worth considering?


4 posted on 03/23/2005 3:27:14 AM PST by thoughtomator (Murder by Judges, 1 - 2 - 3, it's as easy to learn as your ABCBSCNNMSNBCs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

Probably because he wasn't interested in any other result.


5 posted on 03/23/2005 3:31:06 AM PST by DB ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

She does have rights, and so far the courts have upheld them.


6 posted on 03/23/2005 3:33:04 AM PST by deaconjim (Freep the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Terri has no constitutional rights. Neither do any married women in America. That's what all of these courts who are allowing her to be starved to death are saying, anyway.


7 posted on 03/23/2005 3:33:18 AM PST by MisterRepublican (I DEMAND THAT FOX NEWS GET JENNIFER ECCLESTON BACK FROM NBC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
There were seven doctors who have examined Terri and diagnosed her as PVS. You know, licensed physicians that have actually examined her; unlike Hannity's brother, "one of the best radiologists in the country," I'm sure.
8 posted on 03/23/2005 3:37:00 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Dr. Cranford said, to Hannity last night, that PVS persons have no constitutional rights.

Remind me what motivation causes people to work in the "healing" professions. I think it's the same one that causes spouses to be beaten, and dogs to be kicked.

9 posted on 03/23/2005 3:37:03 AM PST by Tax Government (DEATHocrats infest the country. Contribute to FR; that may help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Obviously NOT!!!


10 posted on 03/23/2005 3:37:37 AM PST by TAdams8591 (The call you make may be the one that saves Terri's life!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

She does but according to the courts she allowed for this to happen by confirming it to her husband.


11 posted on 03/23/2005 3:39:07 AM PST by sanchez810
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cagey
yea.....and...

Is Terri a person with constitutional rights AS a Guinea-pig of the ABA and AMA....?

....Mengele lives....?

Golden-Judges say,....to the 'right' and to the 'left'...........New-'Order'-Golden-Kings in Amerika...

Hitler believed in Re-Incarnation 'Karma' Nazi Science!

/Golden Monsters!

God and The Innocent say,....Choose Life!!!......for 'Mercy' sake!

/Nuremberg AGAIN....'TRUE-CRIMES'

12 posted on 03/23/2005 3:41:29 AM PST by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
A "Right" is something a group of like minded people will war to acquire for themselves and their group.
They'll retain that "Right" only as long as they are willing to use force.

"Rights" are not easy or cheap.

13 posted on 03/23/2005 3:41:45 AM PST by ASA Vet (Vigilant Always)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

The only one I've seen named is Dr. Crawford, the longtime euthanasia activist. Do you know the names of any of the others?


14 posted on 03/23/2005 3:41:52 AM PST by thoughtomator (Murder by Judges, 1 - 2 - 3, it's as easy to learn as your ABCBSCNNMSNBCs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MisterRepublican
Your right. If any doctor has any questions regarding treatment for a patient he should: ignore state law; disregard the spouse; ignore the vast majority of expertise and empirical data from his field; petition you and Sean Hannity and his brother-in-law for treatment advice and get Congress involved.
Welcome to medical & family law 2005.
15 posted on 03/23/2005 3:42:41 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
There were seven doctors who have examined Terri and diagnosed her as PVS

Including Cranford, who said she has no rights.

I have another question

If
Terri can't think
and
Terri can't feel
Then
Why are Michael and Felos saying no one would want to live in such a miserable way?

16 posted on 03/23/2005 3:43:14 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Isaiah 32:6 - For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD, to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail.
17 posted on 03/23/2005 3:44:04 AM PST by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

The Constitution does not say that its laws are only for those deemed physically and mentally fit. It would have been a much lesser document if it had.

The "doctor" is deluded and deranged.

Regards, Ivan


18 posted on 03/23/2005 3:45:03 AM PST by MadIvan (One blog to bring them all...and in the Darkness bind them: http://www.theringwraith.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

No, I don't have their names. But all professional opinions have been part of the eight years of litigation--due process denied, indeed--and part of the consideration of the three guardians ad litem that have been appointed and all come to the same conclusions.


19 posted on 03/23/2005 3:45:34 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

Cranford the quack examined her 45 minutes only and he was totally ridiculed onHannity. Hammesfahr examined her for 10 hours and does not believe her to be PVS. Plus he did not get paid to give his opinion unlike the quack.
You seem to have trouble following this case right???
Or Even a TV show for that matter because Hannity only brought up the expertise of his brother an emminent radiologist as to the matter of an MRI test, which is a radiology field and your hero quack was tootally stumped and proven for the incompetent death driven deranged person that he is.
"Tell me who your friends are..."


20 posted on 03/23/2005 3:48:00 AM PST by northernlightsII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Apparently, she has no more rights than an unborne child.


21 posted on 03/23/2005 3:48:31 AM PST by Redleg Duke (Pass Tort Reform Now! Make the bottom clean for the catfish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

The guardians at litem I've researched... the latter two have serious conflicts of interest and cannot be considered credible. The 2003 guardian was particularly bad, IIRC. I wasn't able to find enough info on the first.


22 posted on 03/23/2005 3:49:19 AM PST by thoughtomator (Murder by Judges, 1 - 2 - 3, it's as easy to learn as your ABCBSCNNMSNBCs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

Let's hear from you who exactly performed the diagnosis?


23 posted on 03/23/2005 3:49:23 AM PST by northernlightsII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Becuae that is how the husband feels. You can question his motivation all you want--and the specualtion has been rampant and almost libelous--but he was in the better position to know. Better than any one in this forum, certainly. The matter of law here is simple: when one becomes incapacitated the spouse becomes his or her advocate regarding medical treatment. Whether you agree with Michael Schiave or not; or whether he has been consistent or not; whether he has been true to his wedding vows or not; whether he tortures ants with a magnifying glass or not and whether you like it or not.
That is the rule of law.


24 posted on 03/23/2005 3:52:51 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
Oh so you come here attempting to impeach the credibility of doctors you know nothing about,asserting on the other hand the validity of the diagnosis of of other doctors whom you know nothing about,; all the while basing your argument on the correctness of the finding of the judge when the whole point of this affair and the congressional act is that Greer's finding of facts will not be considered and there should be a trial de novo.
25 posted on 03/23/2005 3:55:06 AM PST by northernlightsII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

The problem is that when you delve into the details there are conflicts of interest all over the place, and a distinct pattern of considering only evidence that supported the husband's position.


26 posted on 03/23/2005 3:56:19 AM PST by thoughtomator (Murder by Judges, 1 - 2 - 3, it's as easy to learn as your ABCBSCNNMSNBCs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

Where did you get your law degree or did you just stay at a Holliday Inn last night.


27 posted on 03/23/2005 3:56:31 AM PST by northernlightsII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Tax Government
Remind me what motivation causes people to work in the "healing" professions.

Reminds me of people who are, somewhat, similar to these folks--

Angels of death

Angels of Death - The Doctors: Why do doctors kill? New chapter on Linda Hazzard who became rich off the deaths of her patients.

Angels of Death - The Female Nurses: Nurses continue to murder their patients. Dr. Katherine Ramsland examines the motives and some high-profile and recent cases.

Angels of Death - The Male Nurses: Evidence of nurses who murder their patients has reached epidemic proportions globally. Dr. Ramsland examines the motives and major cases.

[from page 9, at that link]

the 146,000 male registered nurses represent 5 to 7 percent of all nurses yet are responsible for more than one-third who have killed patients in the U.S. since 1975. 

Since male nurses are statistically over-represented among the nurses who kill, I wonder why Sheriff Everett Rice down there in Florida hired Michael Schiavo without an interview.

It's for sure I wouldn't hire a nurse without an interview.

28 posted on 03/23/2005 3:59:29 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
So your few minutes of internet research should be considered before the opinion of a jurist who might, just might, have more data at his disposal and more working knowledge of Florida law.
Then we consider the appellate courts going up to the Supreme Court, which has already denied cert in this case once--and which it only takes four justices to grant review. If there was such malfeasance or incompetence, don't you think it's remotely possible that one of these venues may have been able to sniff it out as well as you and your keyboard?
29 posted on 03/23/2005 4:00:25 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tax Government

"Dr. Cranford said, to Hannity last night, that PVS persons have no constitutional rights.
Remind me what motivation causes people to work in the "healing" professions. I think it's the same one that causes spouses to be beaten, and dogs to be kicked."

Hitler still lives. He declared them to be inhuman with no rights as he sent millions to the gas chamber. He was able to get plenty of help from his courts to carry out his executions.


30 posted on 03/23/2005 4:02:07 AM PST by jazzlite (esat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Something MUST Be Done Today for Terri Schindler (/schiavo) = *Rescue Her Today! *

Excellent Message: (Pastor) Frank Pavone's homily on Terri and a call for Civil DISOBEDIENCE


These next two threads listed below have been in General / Chat. Maybe they were posted there. I've been asking if they can be moved to "News / Activism", so we can try to get some immediate help for Terri?

Time to send federal marshals to protect Terri!

Time to call Pres. Bush to write executive order [re: Terri S. in Florida]


A Visit With Terri Schiavo - by Attorney Barbara Weller - Christmas Eve day, 2004     (Post #46 - by Pegita)
31 posted on 03/23/2005 4:03:21 AM PST by Golden Gate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
Becuae that is how the husband feels

But Michael is not supposed to be suing for his rights, he is supposed to be suing for Terri's rights.

Michael's chief medical supporter, Dr. Cranford, thinks Terri has no rights.

32 posted on 03/23/2005 4:03:31 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: northernlightsII

I'm not impeaching anything. The courts have considered the opinion of these doctors. See my next post.
Where did you obtain your law degree from?
Personal attacks are quite charming.


33 posted on 03/23/2005 4:03:35 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
No one has the right to tell any other person to kill him. Good Lord, can you imagine the consequences if this weren't so? Every two-bit murderer would simply claim that his victim requested that he be killed, and the burden of proving otherwise would fall on the prosecution.

As a society we've flung ourselves right down the rabbit hole, and we're never going to pull ourselves out again until the notion that a human being is his own chattel property is completely laid to rest, both in the law, and in the public consciousness. The notion that "I own my body and can do anything with it that I please," is what has given rise to the mess we're in.

34 posted on 03/23/2005 4:05:23 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
If there was such malfeasance or incompetence, don't you think it's remotely possible that one of these venues may have been able to sniff it out

Judicial "collegiality" kills.

35 posted on 03/23/2005 4:05:25 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

How the husband feels is material as he is her advocate and, again, he might have been in a slightly better position to know these things than any of us.


36 posted on 03/23/2005 4:06:06 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
Where did you obtain your law degree from?

The same place Jesus got his Divinity degree, no doubt.

37 posted on 03/23/2005 4:07:39 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

So the Florida state judiciary is in cahoots with the federal judiciary to murder this one lady? For collegiality?


38 posted on 03/23/2005 4:08:17 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

So you agree with starving an innocent women to death? As long as a doctor and a judge says it's ok. Hey, killing babies in the womb is ok, too, cause the law says it is.


39 posted on 03/23/2005 4:09:50 AM PST by MisterRepublican (I DEMAND THAT FOX NEWS GET JENNIFER ECCLESTON BACK FROM NBC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr Ramsbotham
Every two-bit murderer would simply claim that his victim requested that he be killed, and the burden of proving otherwise would fall on the prosecution.

My gosh!!

Alice in Wonderland

Welcome to a vibrant land where forwards is backwards, up is down

Terri is trapped in a sick, sick Wonderland.

40 posted on 03/23/2005 4:11:39 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
So the Florida state judiciary is in cahoots with the federal judiciary to murder this one lady? For collegiality?

I didn't say cahoots...you did.

41 posted on 03/23/2005 4:12:55 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MisterRepublican

There are many things that are legal that I don't like. But then one should work to change the law--i.e.-the advocate system of law in Florida seems to be the case here. Isn't that what true conservatism is. Or do principals get thrown out when you don't like the results?


42 posted on 03/23/2005 4:13:08 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

I didn't say cahoots...you did.


What does this mean?


43 posted on 03/23/2005 4:14:10 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: syriacus
Terri has rights and she asked her husband to execute them in case she could not . Now there's no history of her being a religious nut case so lets let the girl go. And the rest of you religious nuts hang around as long as you like. But the federal government has no place in family or state law.Don't you people understand how dangerous this after all the next President might not even act born again.
44 posted on 03/23/2005 4:14:13 AM PST by thmssngr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy
How the husband feels is material

So her right to live depends on whether he is having a good day or a 'roid rage day?

I wonder if Michael used steroids? I hear they can make you cranky.

45 posted on 03/23/2005 4:15:17 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jazzlite

This country is in the grip of immense evil.


46 posted on 03/23/2005 4:15:28 AM PST by Tax Government (DEATHocrats infest the country. Contribute to FR; that may help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Again, wonderful, well thought point. Your forensic skills are sharpening.
I've never heard of an eight year roid rage, though.


47 posted on 03/23/2005 4:16:54 AM PST by SeanEBoy (Success?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SeanEBoy

"Your right. If any doctor has any questions regarding treatment for a patient he should: ignore state law; disregard the spouse; ignore the vast majority of expertise and empirical data from his field; petition you and Sean Hannity and his brother-in-law for treatment advice and get Congress involved.
Welcome to medical & family law 2005."

Have you read history, young man? I suspect you are feeling pretty immortal yourself at the moment..But, your day will come if you live long enough..You might even begin to understand that freedom requires constant vigilence about whether the laws enacted by our government are effective in carrying out what was truly intended in reality. Laws can be distorted for the purpose of reflecting the political goal of raw power. Regarding spouses..50% of the marriages in this nation end in divorce and before those divorces occur, some great animosities grow between the people involved. In our own family, I shudder to think that any of the ex's would have any power over our family member. We had one who would have gone for money over anyone's life. As far as medical expertise..I am a medical person and I can tell you that the first thing one learns in medical school is just how little we know. Vaccinations, winning over infectious disease and the development of good anesthesias and surgeries have increased our life span, along with the good nutrition which keeps so many overweight. It is unfortunate that medical people now think that this kind of success makes them smart enough to challenge God's knowledge of the brain and nervous system which makes possible the expression of the soul. The understanding of all this is a new frontier and those who strut while sitting down, so proud of their definite opinions (in my view simply reflecting the lust for power) about whether Terri should live or die, are pushing us into a place where we do not want to go. Of course, once this kind of thing is set into motion, it spins faster and faster like a tornado and like a tornade, it leaves destruction in it's wake. God help us all!


48 posted on 03/23/2005 4:17:29 AM PST by jazzlite (esat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Excellent point.


49 posted on 03/23/2005 4:19:24 AM PST by silent_jonny (Pro-Life, Pro-Terri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: thmssngr
Terri has rights and she asked her husband to execute them in case she could not

I wan't aware she "asked her husband to execute" her rights.

I am aware he is trying to execute/kill her now.

But since Michael's friendly doctor, Cranford, doesn't think Terri is a person, I guess it's A-ok to kill her.

50 posted on 03/23/2005 4:20:11 AM PST by syriacus (Cranford says "Terri has no constitutional rights." Then why has she got a "right" to be starved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-143 next 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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