All I want to know is, in general, do you believe an individual has a right to specify what actions should be taken for their health if they are no longer able to make decisions for themselves?
"Was dehydrating and starving Terri the right and/or legal thing to do?"
It all depends on whether or not you believe in Living Wills.
If you don't believe that an individual has the right to specify what actions should be taken for their health if they are no longer able to make decisions for themselves, then dehydrating and starving Terri was the wrong and illegal thing to do.
"Was dehydrating and starving Terri the right and/or legal thing to do?"
What does that have to do with the subject of this article? If you can answer that, I'll address your question. Otherwise you're off-topic and should start another thread.
"You're still being very evasive about what you disagree with."
Evasive is not a word in my lexicon. For the third time, I disagreed with the author comparing Martin Pistorious' condition to that of Terri's Schiavo's. I felt it was an unfair comparison, and I said why.
"Is answering a yes or no question really that difficult?"
You and your buddy are doing your darndest to turn this into a Terri Schiavo thread, aren't you? Perhaps you can start a new thread instead.
I was making one simple point. The author was comparing Martin Pistorious' condition to that of Terri's Schiavo's. I felt it was an unfair comparison, and I said why.
That's it. Settle down. Oh, save me some time and copy this to you lengthy list of cohorts -- it runs off my page.
By the way, you have a strange way of welcoming people to FR. More like intimidation.