Joe Nation wrote: On another note: a friend tells me that Warner of Va actually voted nay on the Schiavo bill in the Senate, (so where did FoxNews get unanimous vote from?) Apparently he voted no on the Bill but did not vote to block sending it to the House. So with no votes opposed to sending it, it got sent. So he gets to have it both ways, kind of like a Senator from Massachusetts who voted for a Bill before voting against it.
A tad off topic, here, (OK, I'm completely off topic) but did anyone catch the bill by a Vermont(?) state senator (Republican) legalizing gay marriage that he submitted so that he could oppose it?
I see this case continuing even if Terry Schiavo finally gets to rest in peace. There will be those who will go to court to have her exhumed and reconnected to IV lines. Mark my words...
While I'm at it, I thought Christians believed in the afterlife? Surely someone as innocent as Ms. Schiavo will ascend to heaven. Why the obsession with keeping her nominally alive?
Quote:I expect each of you to blindly buy all future court decisions. Which, hey, that's how you get your political information....shouldn't be surprised.
Amen.
Courts are were I get my legal ruling information from. I would never rely on a court for 'politcal information.'
I get my news from news organizations. But I often check for more than one source and if possible check the original source if it is about something that is readily available.
In reality, I don't like "political information". It usually is slanted and untrue.
Lash wrote:There were testimonies that she wanted to die, and testimonies she wanted to live...
No, there were testimonies that when speaking of another person (apparently when she was 12) she felt that they should not remove that person from life support. When speaking of herself (as an adult), she only ever said that she would not want to live that way. There's quite a difference. Were I weighing the evidence, I would lend a bit more weight to the statements made as an adult.
I heard a rightwinger on the Ed Shultz show arguing with him on when life ends. According to him, it is when the heart stops beating.
I seriously doubt he's the only one who shares that belief.
And so, I would suggest that we just remove Terri's heart and place it in a special glass container, hook it up to an artificial pump, and keep it beating indefinitely.
I would also suggest that any and all of you who may have a questionable medical condition, please, by all means videotape your ailment, and send it to Dr. Bill Frist, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C., for an "accurate" diagnosis.
I also heard another suggestion that we could have a lottery for ALL Congressmen/women who voted to keep this insanity going, and whoever wins can be the sole guardian and caregiver for Terri Shiavo's brainless body for the rest of her unnatural life. Then we can create a reality show out of that, and watch as the lucky winner scrambles to make ends meet as medical costs go through the roof.
Wouldn't it be sweet justice if Dr. Frist won?
Braondon wrote:
Quote:Okay, now we're getting somewhere. These appear to be the relevant portions of the article at that link......
Translation: I don't apologize even when its obvious I was wrong.
Quote: [What words? Unclear in this article.]
Unclear? Try paragraph 3.
Quote:"Terri made mention at that conversation that, "If I ever go like that, just let me go. Don't leave me there. I don't want to be kept alive on a machine,"' Scott Schiavo, Michael Schiavo's brother, told lawyers years afterward.
It usually helps to read an article before you cut and paste from the end of it.
Dookiestix wrote:I heard a rightwinger on the Ed Shultz show arguing with him on when life ends. According to him, it is when the heart stops beating.
Well then under his criteria she died 15 years ago.
Right.
They aren't ceasing medical intervention.
They're ceasing post-mortem experiments.
Paging Dr. Frankenstein....
I believe Dr Frankenstein has been physically dead much longer...
Bring on the resurrectionists...
cicerone imposter wrote:I believe Dr Frankenstein has been physically dead much longer...
Ixnay on the ottenray....
Unless you're talking about Bush and his cronies...
Terri Schiavo had her day in court all the up to the Supreme Court of our country. I don't see how the judges in Atlanta can change their decision because that means all state laws and judges decisions can questioned and possibly overturned. That opens up more problems for the federal system than they will be able to handle in the future.
Joe Nation wrote:Testimony:
Interesting word.
1 a (1) : the tablets inscribed with the Mosaic law (2) : the ark containing the tablets b : a divine decree attested in the Scriptures
2 a : firsthand authentication of a fact : EVIDENCE b : an outward sign c : a solemn declaration usually made orally by a witness under oath in response to interrogation by a lawyer or authorized public official3 a : an open acknowledgment b : a public profession of religious experience
Under most circumstances testimony would be a word with some weight to it, but not to Brandon9000. Statements made in court, under oath, reviewed and ascertained to be credible by the officials...
What rot. All it boils down to is that the unsubstantiated word of one person who may have conflicting motives is not a lot of evidence. That is obvious just on the face of it. Now that I see from a link posted here that there were two or three people who said they heard such sentiments from her, and two who said they heard her express the opposite view, it becomes more complex.
You ever find evidence for your assertion that someone feeding her using a spoon would be forcibly restrained?
D'artagnan wrote:I see this case continuing even if Terry Schiavo finally gets to rest in peace. There will be those who will go to court to have her exhumed and reconnected to IV lines. Mark my words...
While I'm at it, I thought Christians believed in the afterlife? Surely someone as innocent as Ms. Schiavo will ascend to heaven. Why the obsession with keeping her nominally alive?
The possibility that she knows she exists and wishes to live.
It really doesn't matter that people question Michael's motives. HE IS THE LEGAL GUARDIAN; and the majority of Americans wants it that way.
This is not a CRIMINAL CASE. It's a legal guardian case.
parados wrote:Braondon wrote:
Quote:Okay, now we're getting somewhere. These appear to be the relevant portions of the article at that link......
Translation: I don't apologize even when its obvious I was wrong.
The article states that there were people who testified both ways at that trial. But even had it all been testimony that she wanted to die, who on this board apologizes when he loses a debating point? Certainly not you.
DrewDad wrote:You ever find evidence for your assertion that someone feeding her using a spoon would be forcibly restrained?
I answered that clearly. I said that if you will but state for the record that you believe someone attempting to come in and feed her would be allowed to, I will cite you a link. I do not guarantee I will be on A2K 24 x 7, though.
