Replies

You were hoodwinked. She had 0% chance of waking. Further, if we are to believe it, she herself said (beforehand) that she wouldn't want to "live" that way. Even if she told you that personally, you'd still keep her body alive forever if you could, why don't you admit it. You want personal control of her life and death.

Well, one could say that you were hoodwinked. Who said that she had "0% chance" of waking? The physicians Mr. Schiavo hired? And "she herself claimed she wouldn't want to live that way"? According to whom? The only person who heard this "request" was her "husband" AFTER he milked the system, claiming the money he got would be for her rehabiliation. Now, if she had "0% chance" of waking, what was Mr. Schiavo going to rehabiliate?

And those of us who saw this for what it was, legally sanctioned murder, could say the same about those of you who wanted this woman "let go". You all wanted personal control of her life and death also, hence why you continuously try to convince yourselves that her murder was justified, thinking ONLY of yourselves ("I wouldn't want to live that way").

Just a thought.

YOU were hoodwinked. YOU and people like YOU bought the lies of the MSM and the Euthanasia lobby. She was awake and was diagnosed as semi-concious on the fourth day of her last dehydration/starvation by an impartial physician from the Florida Department of Children and Services.

Food and water are NOT extraordinary means. Ventilators and heart machines however are. IF we are to believe the testimony of the four Schiavo's (and I don't) Terri said upon learning one of the Schiavo relatives was placed on a ventilator, she would not want to exist that way. Feeding tubes at that time were NOT an issue and it is highly unlikely she was even aware of them let alone was referring to them when she allegedly made those comments. Nor did she say she wanted to be starved and dehydrated to death. Furthermore, she made comments which contradict the testimony of the Schiavo's such as those regarding Karen Ann Quinlin, where she said, "Where there's life there's hope."

With such contradictory testimony and NOTHING in writing, you don't put someone to death. We don't even sell homes or property without written documentation, but we should put people to death without it?

Sorry, bub, when the issue is the serious matter of life and death, and where there is genuine doubt as there was in this case, and no documentation, the assumption should be life, NOT death.