>> It’s already been proven. Michael’s court testimony was documented.
Your troll-tactic of changing the subject mid-sentence is an old one. Okay, so now you want to make it about the laws that were violated. Or is it about Terri’s knowledge of law? Could you try to say something that actually makes sense? <<
OK. Ms. Schaivo told her husband to not let her stay if she was a vegetable. You weren’t there, so you don’t know.
>>He did what? Take care of her for the rest of their lives? The context in which he gave that testimony suggested that he promised to take care of her in the true sense of caring, not in the sense of “I’ll take care of that bitch.” Killing her was the direct opposite of what he testified he promised to do for her.<<
He did the best he could with meddling parents and other nosey types getting in their personal business.
>>What does that have to do with anything we were discussing? Nothing. But trolls must change the subject frequently. So okay, you want to talk about Terri’s estranged husband violating more than just his vow not to kill her. You want to introduce his sexual infidelity. But how do his sexual escapades support small government? I don’t get the connection you’re trying to make there.<<
It was you all that introduced the husband’s peccadilloes. My point is they are irrelevant, no matter how much you Nanny-Staters want to bring them up.
>>So now you’re saying that when she grew up her family should have severed all involvement in her life? That’s what you claimed they did in your previous post. Make up your mind. Pick a belief, and defend that belief. Only trolls change their belief midstream to enable them to continue arguing.<<
You are very slow. I will go slowly. When you marry, you give up almost all legal ties to your previous family. And if an adult leaves his/her home the legal ties to the original family become tenuous. Marriage severs them altogether.
Of coure, you Nanny Staters will say anything an build any straw man to make sure you defend Big Government to support your political agenda.
>>Mixed what up? Are you now trying to suggest that it’s their fault Michael embezzled Terri’s rehab money?<<
You can’t embezzle what is yours. The parents only started “caring” substantially when there was money involved. They had no legal standing and I continue to be amazed the court let them in.
Were YOU there?
How do you know she told him? Did you hear it yourself?
They weren't involved. They were too involved. They weren't involved. And now we're back to them being too involved again. Okay, what was your point again?
It was you all that introduced the husband’s peccadilloes. My point is they are irrelevant, no matter how much you Nanny-Staters want to bring them up.
No, that was you.
You are very slow. I will go slowly. When you marry, you give up almost all legal ties to your previous family. And if an adult leaves his/her home the legal ties to the original family become tenuous. Marriage severs them altogether.
No, Terri retained the legal right to associate with her family, even after she got married. A marriage license is not a bill of sale.
Of coure, you Nanny Staters will say anything an build any straw man to make sure you defend Big Government to support your political agenda.
You seem to have me confused with someone who supports the government's "right" to order the death of innocent citizens against their wishes.
You can’t embezzle what is yours.
Terri's rehab money belonged to Terri. Her estranged husband was awarded separate funds to compensate him for his alleged loss of consortium. Aside from the fact that he obtained the award through what he later acknowledged was fraud, that part of the money was his. The money he embezzled from Terri's rehab fund was hers. If a marriage license really was a bill of sale, you might have a point, but it isn't.
The parents only started “caring” substantially when there was money involved.
Even Terri's estranged husband admitted that's not true.
And if an adult leaves his/her home the legal ties to the original family become tenuous. Marriage severs them altogether.
Which is it? Giving up *almost all* legal ties? Or *severs them completely*?
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth.