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

Skip to comments.

Schiavo Moves Closer to Death (Schindlers Attorney: She Has 'Passed the Point of No Return')
ITV of Britain ^ | 3.27.05 9:49 PM

Posted on 03/27/2005 2:35:40 PM PST by gopwinsin04

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-290 last
To: sweetliberty
Thank you for the answer.

Because Satan's most intense activity occurs at the most sacred times.

I have waited to reply because this needed to really sink in.

281 posted on 03/28/2005 1:18:50 AM PST by ARridgerunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Collier

Thanks and accept my sympathies as well


282 posted on 03/28/2005 4:52:52 AM PST by hydrotech1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: winstonchurchill

I don't know anyone who always rejects the removal of a feeding tube. They object in this case because of the facts surrounding the case, particularly the discrepancy between the husband's report of the wife's desires before the lawsuit and his report of the wife's desires after the lawsuit.

The family says she would not voice a desire to be terminated in such a manner.

Prior to the lawsuit the husband presented her case as one in which he claimed damages just so he could continue her care. His argument, if effect, was that she wanted to continue living in that manner.

After the lawsuit, he suspiciously remembered that she wanted to die in such a situation, but in some unguarded moments he has slipped and indicated he doesn't know what she would have wanted.

For me, it's a simple thing. Give a full hearing that includes a review of all old and all new evidence. Give the girl a chance to recover.

Finally, don't pretend it's a natural death when you forcibly prevent natural feeding.


283 posted on 03/28/2005 5:14:40 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: BibChr
This would be that "pain" she's not suffering as she enjoys this blissful, euphoric experience the intelligentsia all assure us she's having?

Yes, we've been lied to. I think most of us understood that. The underlying motive is what I can't quite fathom. Why does the left want so desperately for her to die? The only answer that presents itself plainly is that the blue staters want symbolic revenge for the election.

BTW, Terri's health isn't the only thing that has passed the point of no return. This public lynching is THE low point in 21st Century American morality.

284 posted on 03/28/2005 6:19:36 AM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Yes, we've been lied to. I think most of us understood that. The underlying motive is what I can't quite fathom. Why does the left want so desperately for her to die? The only answer that presents itself plainly is that the blue staters want symbolic revenge for the election.

Spend some time reading liberal rags or listening to the liberal spokesman who loves men, barney franks etcetera and it will become obvious to you. The liberals consider this a 'privacy' issue --ANYTHING is okay because it is private --murder, euthanasia, suicide, sodomy, abortion etcetera etcetera... How dare the government keep Terri alive when this is a delicate and private family matter within the sanctity of marriage blah blah /sarcasm off

285 posted on 03/28/2005 6:38:59 AM PST by DBeers ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: xzins
The family says she would not voice a desire to be terminated in such a manner. That statement sounds vaguely hypothetical. How could anyone say she 'would not voice a desire' as to such and such, unless she had made a declarative statement to the contrary and then the declarative statement is the stronger evidence. And yet, at the trial, the mother offered no such statement and no other member of her family (other than Michael, Scott and Joan) was even called to testify.

For me, it's a simple thing. Give a full hearing that includes a review of all old and all new evidence.

So, tell me, under your theory of jurisprudence how many full 'do-overs' does the loser in a lawsuit get? One, two, ten, as many as he wants? When would anything be decided?

Just the review of the procedure for fairness and applicable law took 5 years and 5 appellate and reviewing courts. Imagine what a couple of factual retrials would have consumed.

Let's be honest. The opponents of Terri's right to die would keep insisting on more trials and more appeals until they finally got the result (further imprisonment of Terri in that awful body) that they wanted. Then, of course, they would be satisfied that 'justice' was done.

286 posted on 03/28/2005 1:01:58 PM PST by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: avile
A: I admit that many terri supporters would be against starving her even if a living will were unearthed...

WC: Much of the nonsense here has been supposedly aimed at the fact-finding process as to Terri's wishes. But you now admit, what I have long suspected, that you won't be satisfied until our nursing homes are filled to overflowing with breathing cadavers being pumped with slurry and having their diapers changed, notwithstanding their carefully worded living wills to the contrary, because their views don't match yours.

A: where did i admit any of this you jerk? what i said is that MS's disreputable behavior made many people who normally would not have been interested in the case pay attention.

No, what you admitted was that 'many Terri supporters' wouldn't be satisfied even if Terri had expressed her wishes in writing. It isn't about the accuracy of the determination of her wishes; it's about the fact that 'many Terri supporters' don't agree with her wishes and don't want to let her get free of the slurry and the diapers no matter what she wants.

287 posted on 03/28/2005 1:12:48 PM PST by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: winstonchurchill; P-Marlowe

My analysis is that we're still awaiting the first hearing of all the new evidence. In a capital case, any new evidence should generate a full review.

You don't get a 2nd chance to get it right after you kill the party involved.


288 posted on 03/28/2005 2:51:25 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
ROTFLOL!! Just what is it you want me to get ..??

If you have to ask, it won't matter, what I say. Good luck.

289 posted on 03/29/2005 10:42:33 AM PST by itsahoot (There are some things more painful than the truth, but I can't think of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

ROTFLOL!!!

You say I don't "get it" - when I ask you to tell me what I "don't get" - you CAN'T TELL ME .. ROTFLOL!!

Oh my goodness!!


290 posted on 03/29/2005 10:47:16 AM PST by CyberAnt (President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-290 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