Skip to comments.Terri's Story
Posted on 12/03/2006 3:03:26 AM PST by 8mmMauser
click here to read article
Murder victims surely do.
On 25 November 1999 - Thanksgiving Day in the USA - Elian was found floating on an inner tube off the Florida coast after the boat taking him from Cuba sank killing his mother and 10 other people.
You don't have to exchange gifts even one time. Cold hearts just buy gifts grudgingly. I don't believe this thread was to make someone care who does not, so don't post anything. The tragedy of her death doesn't require snitty remarks.
I think Terri deserves a nice clean thread. I think the moderators agree, as you can see. It is tough I know.
That was not the case. Bobby Sr. and Bobby Jr. both filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on the same day just prior to Terri's accident. Not Chapter 13, like Trump, that would restructure debt. Chapter 7 wiped out the debt and left the creditors holding the bag.
The only reason I bring this up is because the link at the top goes to a website that solicits donations for the Schindlers.
As far as the Schindlers caring for Terri, they tried that early on and couldn't do it. She ended up back in a nursing facility.
Happy Birthday, Les -- sorry I was a little slow, but consider yourself showered with love, sung to, kissed and surrounded by stacks of birthday cards that a certain skunky husband didn't throw away :-)
I always think of Ted Bundy -- a great right-to-die activist before it became popular. Ted helped at least 30, probably more than 100, young women achieve their undeclared wish "not to live like that." Ted himself died quite young (42) on January 24, 1989, crisped by 2,000 volts in the Florida electric chair. That was back when Florida executed murderers instead of innocent disabled women.
Thanks for the reminder. The betrayal of Elian brings back memories of my shock at how far our Nation of Laws had bent. That emotion was unmatched until greater flouting of law brought Terri into the forefront.
Terri has brought us new friends and has unmasked otherwise unrecognized enemies of life.
Does't matter. This was a tragedy. I bear no animosity to people who fall on hard times. What we do not always know are the reasons why. All in all it really has nothing to do with this case. Chapter 13 or Chapter 7, those things are really not relevant to the way Terri was abused. The other day someone fed me some gossip on another thread that only slightly had anything at all to do with the issue, I don't care.
You are so right. Terri did not die in vain. She opened our eyes to the insidious euthanasia movement in our country and the inroads these barbarians have made. She put a face on an unseen enemy for us.
It wasn't true. It was an absurd story cooked up by slick lawyers. George Felos called in Michael Schiavo's brother and sister-in-law for meetings. They suddenly "remembered" scraps of meaningless conversation from ten or fifteen years earlier. Judge Greer stamped this transparent fraud "clear and convincing" (which the law requires) and that was the death sentence.
You're right about the second point. Florida law does not allow assisted suicide. They got Terri under a loophole that allows a patient to refuse medical care -- and if the patient dies, too bad. But first they had to change the law to re-define feeding tubes as medical care. That was done for the sole purpose of killing patients. If PEG tubes are medical care, then unconscious patients can "refuse" them and be dehydrated / starved to death, as Terri was.
Lawyers and judges like this make the whole world puke.
Others can describe this wonderful priest far better than I, this priest who stood courageously at Terri's side. May our world be blessed with many priests as fine as Monsignor Malanowski!
Monsignor Malanowski has written this special tribute for us to print here, for Terris List, and for those on FreeRepublic who may read these threads in tribute for Terri, one fitting for the Catholic season of Advent which is now upon us, and for the gift Terri has given us all.
I am drinking no Kool-Aid, from either the Left or the Terri posters. What in my post gave you that idea?
I posted no "points." I think you meant to direct your comments to somebody else.
We ARE NOT born because our lives are supposed to be carefree. And others ARE NOT to be killed off simply because they are a nuisance to us.
You seemed critical of the anti-euthanasia movement.
Let me ask you this, why shouldn't we keep bringing it up? Do you also think we should quit bringing up abortion? Because in the end, abortion and euthanasia are nothing more than two sides of the same coin. One is either pro-life or they are pro-death -- it makes no difference if it is a baby in the womb or a woman in a hospital bed terrified because her food and water has been deprived, it is morally wrong to proclaim that a person must die simply because their life is no longer convenient for the person who opts to kill.
At least get your facts right....because you're wrong on every count here.
Actually, I am done with this thread. What happened to Terri has no justification, and arguing legalities and who went bankrupt and which person you believe more is asinine. If you are so right on whatever counts you are speaking, tell someone else.
Have a great day!
As always, you guys bring up the arguments, and then refuse to support them. It's been going on for years. This is an emotional argument...but on facts, you always lose.
No argument. Terri did not deserve to die like that. Read the post above by wagglebee. Fact of life!
Sadly, the Culture of Death has diminished the public's mindset to the point that some feel that a reason must be given as to why a person doesn't deserve to be dehydrated to death.
Sorry, meant to ping you in #78.
This thread is proof that the far Left isn't the only group using this case to push an agenda.
That is certainly the case! It is an agenda far as I am concerned, a conservative pro-life agenda in the same spirit as my inspiration of old, Ronald Reagan. The agenda to push is to counter the euthanasia crowd on the left from plying their craft. That is a good thing, no?
Thank you for visiting this thread in tribute to Terri and her legacy.
That's the point..JUST SAY IT, say that instead of trying to twist the facts to support your viewpoint? Why shouldn't that be enough for you?
I believe that preserving the life of an innocent person is always ENOUGH. Why should we get into a court battle and have an unconvicted innocent person die because a power-hungry, agenda-driven state judge thinks he can ignore a Congressional subpoena.
Even more interesting is why so many amateur Columbos believe they know more about this than those who actually investigated it?
Everyone followed the law. You don't like the law, fight to change it...everything and anything less is a cop out.
Are you saying that Congress doesn't have the authority to subpoena someone to appear before a committee?
Or are you saying that the Florida state legislature doesn't have the authority to enact legislation?
Because it seems to me that in the end, the "law" was adjudicated by a judge and nowhere in the Consitution of Florida or of the United States of America is any judge empowered with the right to make new law.
You seemed critical of the anti-euthanasia movement.
Let me ask you this, why shouldn't we keep bringing it up?
You can keep bringing it up, of course you can. Free country.
But I am, and will continue to be, critical of anyone who decries the Left's use of Terri's death to advance a social agenda while simultaneously doing the exact same thing.
How is trying to preserve the status quo (i.e. not being allowed to just adjudicate that an innocent person who has never been convicted of anything should be deprived food an water in an effort to kill them) advancing a social agenda?
Are you critical when Roe v. Wade gets brought up?
I don't think I understand your question. Of course every post here is to advance a social agenda of one kind or another.
My only real beef is the hypocrisy of the original post - complaining that the libs use Terri's name to score political points while simltaneously using Terri's name to score political points.
Islamofascists use September 11, 2001 as a recruiting tool; by your logic we would be hypocritical to criticize the Islamofascists for this and at the same time use 9/11 as a reminder to be vigilant.
So, yes, the left is trying to score political points and we on the right are trying to save human life. No hypocracy appears that I can see.
Thank you for the responses, though. It is a good opportunity to bring to light some misconceptions.
I keep quoting Martin Katz ("The American Thinker"): "We, as a society . . . have not managed, for whatever reason, to permit a mother, deluded or not, to put water onto the lips of her dying child, brain dead or not. . . We have placed ourselves one notch less, above the Nazis . . . we cannot look Mary Schindler, Terri Schiavo's mother, in the eye, and give her one good reason why WE did not allow her to give water to her dying child. . ."
I am clapping my hands. Your post is artwork!
That why I have such a problem with these death vampires that have invaded our posts. I notice that those of their ilk use law to replace the need for morality. They do not understand the concept of just because it is legal doesn't make it moral.
We are countering an effort by the far left and allies to install a program of euthanasia.
Which is a political agenda.
Words mean things. Only leftists try to redefine words - let's not stoop to such tactics.
Supporting the right to life is a "social agenda"?! Both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution uphold the right to life (5th and 14th Amendments). Do you object to them too?
Rebuking a killer while defending the victim's right to life does not make us hypocrites. There is no moral equivalency between a murderer and his victim.
Supporting the right to life is a "social agenda"?!
Yes, it is. And a political one as well.
"Social agenda" is not necessarily a bad thing. There are good agendas and bad ones.
So, doing the right thing is -- so you say -- just as bad as doing evil, because -- so you say -- they are both "political agendas"?
Evidently Orwell's Ministry of Truth had it right after all:
All Big Brother had to do is call them social agendas or political agendas.
I didn't say that at all. Is a strawman really the best you can offer?
>> Yes, it is. And a political one as well.
Aw, c'mon. We are talking about great numbers of people who have different hearts, minds, motives and goals. To lump them together in some simplistic category is intellectually lazy, sloppy, or dishonest (or all three).
Neither is it true to life to suppose that anyone acts out an allegiance to some "agenda." I certainly do not do my work here for a social or political agenda. I do it because I see it as my moral responsibility. We are all moved by our values and ideals, not by agendas.
That is the unavoidable logic of your statement. You were using moral equivalence to equate 8mmMauser's work with that of the Left -- because they were both (according to you) social agendas. There is no other way to interpret what you said.