The latest twist in the Schiavo case.......

[BUTT 0]

Well, people, I'm sorry to say that your opinions on this matter are irrelevant. There is only one man in the world whose political opinions matter, and he has spoken:

 

 

And surprisingly, he doesn't think Schiavo should be kept alive, although I'll be damned if I can figure out what his point is:

 

The story that Michael wants her to die to collect money is weak. There is none he will get. Neither has it been proven that he selfishly and inconsiderately blew any money on a high lifestyle in lieu of getting her treatment. Her family telling me he has withheld therapy from Terry is sorry ass. If he did, that’s abominable. But if it was my child and I believed more concentrated therapy would help, I’d find a way to pay or learn how to do it myself, and it wouldn’t take me fifteen years. I haven’t heard that her family has been prohibited from seeing her or being with her. And if she, different from the credible medical analysis it seems, has the potential to rebuild her cognitive abilities, show me -- again, especially after 15 years -- more than the same 10 seconds of footage over and over of her trailgazing a balloon. If it’s your argument that more therapy would bring her out of the state she is in, help me out, tell me where you have been for fifteen years and why there is no progress to show for it. The fuller story -- the whole story we will never know -- is that Terry was bulimic and once when purging her food (ironically, to fool her body it was starving) had a heart attack, shut her system down and cut off oxygen to her brain. The subtitle on all the news programs is “Brain dead due to chemical imbalance.” This is physiologically correct. She purged all her electrolytes, her potassium levels went through the roof and her heart freaked out. But for me that’s not enough to tell. Give me more. Things like: Through self-abuse, she caused her vegetative condition. She, alone, is responsible for her condition. Yet, try getting those who have conspiratorially embellished the story (her husband had something criminal to do with it) to believe this truth. Maybe it’s just that neither the therapists or law enforcement down in Florida are any good. I don’t know. Add it to the list of other things I don’t know. I agree that it is tragic and sad. But. It has always seemed to me (and I always get back to this in everything I say and write), in these issues over ‘what is the right thing to do’, ‘what is the wrong thing not to do’, that it would go a long way toward reaching agreed -upon effective solutions if reason, facts and truth were prioritized and important persistently. That is to say -- if what were right and wrong were yielded to all the time instead of just when it suits biased purposes. Terry Schiavo isn’t the only human being in this condition. Her parents aren’t the only ones suffering. This is not the only feeding tube that has ever been pulled. Both political sides are slinging hope-it-sticks crap, not at a reparable, patchable wall, but at our already well denigrated and pockmarked constitution, our government of laws, not men.

 

I have to say what others have not.

 

Terry Schiavo's life is not the most important one on the line, here. The life of our Republic is. The life of our kids’ future is. The life of the future lying ahead for every single human being yet to come is. As much as our hearts may be disturbed, our heads and our consciences should be more bothered by how our gov reps, sworn to uphold our Constitution, are showing no informed restraint at all about trampling all over it. Schiavo got her “due justice” -- by any and all forms of reasonable and rational interpretation, both judiciously and medically. It does not matter that there are those who erroneously think she did not -- SHE DID! All the rest of this demagoguery going on is nothing but sophistry and judicial venue shopping --and this ugly admixture is a starvation more cruel (of something else) than the painless one Schiavo is being subjected to now.

 

There is ONE life and then their are the LIVES of all the others. As sorrowful as it may be on an individual basis, sustaining the life of the concepts within our Founding documents is more important than saving one person’s life. Especially if it means that while we rescue ANY ONE life we also kill -- compromise by compromise, slight by slight, ruse by ruse, con by con -- the life of the very thing that allows each human being here in this country to have their unalienable right protected in the first place. What does it say about us if we misuse and misrepresent, through calculated ill-interpretations, our Constitution, to only protect each one of our own cheap, personal selfish rights -- sure! while we are living -- but don’t leave any Constitutional integrity behind for generations yet to come? The Founders and Framers did just that for us. They gave everything they had so that one day others would reap all their fight wrought. What makes us think we are to do any less? Did they suffer less? Can we say they didn’t give so much? Were their hearts never broken? Did they exist pain free and sorrowless? Are we that weak, so narrow-minded and shallow in our beliefs, human substance and knowledge of how great our Republic is that we would be ok with leaving behind a pile of rubble and a supply of modern-day super glue thinking that would be enough to fix it?

 

I find it ironic how neoconservatives believe in a messianic mission to spread democracy around the World (two evils -- democracy and spreading it -- our Founders were against themselves), but won’t accept the fact (one out of their their control) that bad, sad and tragic things happen to the beings in this World. I figure, playing God goes both ways: there’s killing what can live, and not letting die what is maybe meant to. This 'full understanding' is not one phony Conservatives believe they need to have; the God they play is above it. For me, believing in only half of something half the time is what I call hypocrisy. If there are life-things we can't find the answers to, then, I figure, neither are we supposed to be persistent at making stupid, dumb-ass fools out of ourselves acting God-like like we have. Neos should approach the liberals about whether their trademark jack-ass might be for sale; the asses they are making out of themselves are custom-fit for that saddle. If they really believed, they’d be consistent believing this each moment of their short lives: at the end of day, human beings trying and failing at many earthly things, God will sort it all out to suit Himself. But they aren’t and they don’t. Depending on political motives, moods and biases, they put in, or take from, His hands.

 

My sympathies go out to the Schiavos. They really do. But our Founding documents aren’t their daughter’s alone. They are mine. They are yours. They are for ALL flesh and blood, not just for the flesh and blood of ONE. They are for young, fully alive and animated people who have not yet had a chance to experience the freedoms and protections they secure. They are, even more, for those who are not living yet. All of us need to never forget that. People living in tougher times didn't question it or doubt it. Schiavo is brain dead. Her head is literally filled with mush. Never will her mind work to think again. Yet, here we are, so many of us, willing to defend her single, solitary existence, sacrificing our own laws and creating out of thin air empty, unjust ones, while at the same time further breeding a future existence where, one day, human beings with minds that do work and can think will, quite likely, live under a government where they will not even be allowed to do so.

 

http://www.ultimatewarrior.com/03.22.05.htm

 

 

So there!

[CanadianChris 0]

Wow. Warrior speaks the truth.

[BUTT 0]

You could tell what he was saying?!

[Slickster 0]

I have to say, I am HIGHLY skeptical about her ability to speak. Don't you think someone would have a TAPE of this?

There was a tape realised by some repuitable non-profit organization of her talking on a tape. Most of it was just moans and what not, but there was a part where her dad asked her if she was and pain, and while I am a skeptic on the entire situation, I thought I heard her say yes. Not saying she did not saying she didn't, just in my opinion sounded like she was saying yes.

Correllation does not = causation. The clips of her supposedly responding to her parents talking about memories are heavily edited from HOURS of footage. To say those clips are proof of life is facetious. If I stood on Main Street talking about how much I like green cars, I'm sure eventually a green car will pass by. Did my talking about green cars directly cause this event? No, such a thing is scientifically impossible. The same for the Schiavo footage; for all we know they could have been talking *at* her for hours waiting for some semblance of a response.

 

Someone on another forum sees Terri as Michigan J. Frog, "because she supposedly can talk and look around when her parents are around but can't do a damned thing when anyone else asks her to repeat the event."

 

Mike has truly shown off his best work in this thread. No-selling posts, refusing to provide evidence for the claims of these innumerable nurses whose testimony runs counter to the rulings of twenty courts....incredible stuff for a man who promised to leave this forum for good just a few months ago.

 

I'm glad that Terri Schiavo's life of freakshow-like indignity is over. They can bury her next to TheMikeSC's credibility.

[CanadianChris 0]

You could tell what he was saying?!

He used a lot more words than I (or any other rational person) would use, but I got the essence of his point. He's basically saying that the integrity of the government is bigger than any one person, and the U.S. government was wrong and foolish to try and overturn the state court's decision.

[Guest MikeSC]

I just googled Michelle Malkin, and I'm pretty sure she's out of her mind. She wrote a book about how racial profiling during WWII was a GOOD idea.

No, she argued that it was a necessary step. Also mentioned, and most people forget this, Japanese were not the only ones interned (Germans and Italians were as well) and they did not HAVE to go to camps (they only went when they had nowhere else to go).

 

Why not READ it before blindly bashing it?

He used a lot more words than I (or any other rational person) would use, but I got the essence of his point. He's basically saying that the integrity of the government is bigger than any one person, and the U.S. government was wrong and foolish to try and overturn the state court's decision.

He also claimed that the founding father felt democracy was an evil.

-=Mike

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

Point taken about Malkin, but that's another issue.

[Ripper 0]

The thing is, there is a possiblity that she is feeling pain. Will she ever have a normal life again, most likely not. I don't think she is going to wake up and start talking again. But if her brain is doing enough to make her body functions still operate, then there is a possibility that she is feeling pain.

 

Now you say "Why wouldn't her parents want her out of her misery if she is in pain"? Well, I would agree with you if it was a case of turning off a breathing machine and she would pass away. But she is being STARVED to death. When a parent is caught with some starving child at home, people curse the parents and say they hope they get life in jail. It is tourture, plain and simple. And if there is even a sliver of a chance she is feeling pain, she is being put through torture. I don't agree with Mike on much, but he is right. If this was a criminal set to be executed there would be even bigger upcry.

 

Hell, the same relegious leaders that claim "We don't know if a fetus feels pain during an abortion" is all for STARVING A WOMAN TO DEATH. She is going to waste away until her stomach acids start to eat away at her stomach lining. She is going to die a horrible death for anyone. And while she probably does not have intellegible thought processes going on, that has never been necessary to feel pain.

 

You want to shoot her up with morphine and end it, then fine. but starving a person to death because they can't say "Hey, I'm hungry." is horrible.

[CanadianChris 0]

He used a lot more words than I (or any other rational person) would use, but I got the essence of his point. He's basically saying that the integrity of the government is bigger than any one person, and the U.S. government was wrong and foolish to try and overturn the state court's decision.

He also claimed that the founding father felt democracy was an evil.

-=Mike

You'll have to point me to that one.

[redbaron29 0]

life support: medical equipment that assists or replaces important bodily functions and so enables a patient to live who otherwise might not survive

 

If a person is unable to feed him/herself, I would say a feeding tube definitely qualifies. Malkin's whole point is just ridiculous semantics.

Bouldersdash....If that is your logic then newborns qualify under the same exact situation. Granted they dont require "medical feeding tube" they require somebody to assist them in feeding them. They are "unable to actually go seek food" and must be feed either by a mothers breast, or bottle. They are by no means on "life support".

[Ripper 0]

He used a lot more words than I (or any other rational person) would use, but I got the essence of his point. He's basically saying that the integrity of the government is bigger than any one person, and the U.S. government was wrong and foolish to try and overturn the state court's decision.

He also claimed that the founding father felt democracy was an evil.

-=Mike

You'll have to point me to that one.

I find it ironic how neoconservatives believe in a messianic mission to spread democracy around the World (two evils -- democracy and spreading it -- our Founders were against themselves),

 

 

Yeah....I'm done with him.

[Slickster 0]

I'm assuming Warrior was referring to pure democracy (Greek-style one-man, one-vote rule), in which case he would be correct.

[Ripper 0]

I'm assuming Warrior was referring to pure democracy (Greek-style one-man, one-vote rule), in which case he would be correct.

You are going to have to change your avatar before i can possibly give your post the attention they need. Its too distracting.

 

 

 

Ripper - Pot since 3:31 p.m.

[2GOLD 0]

I have one simple question about this case.

Can she breath on her own?

 

If the answer is yes, then she is not dead. To rule her dead will open the door to people who feel their grandparents are a burden. Her brain may be bye bye but if her body is breathing on it's own then something is working. She won't improve, but too god damn bad.

 

I'm all for pulling the plug on the breathing machine and for killing someone with a terminal disease who says "kill me please", not so much for starving someone to death who is breathing.

 

Now if you want to walk in with a shotgun and finish the job, fine. But starving to death someone who is breathing on their own? HELL NO.

[NoCalMike 0]

*paging Dr. Kevorikian*

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

It took me like 10 minutes after I sent that Warrior link to Fark for Fark to greenlight it to the front page.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Sweet move Rob! Let the Warriors insanity spread across the land!

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Sweet move Rob! Let the Warriors insanity spread across the land!

Actually, I have over 600 approved articles on Fark. But, I'm pretty sure half of them came before 2003 too.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Sweet move Rob!   Let the Warriors insanity spread across the land!

Actually, I have over 600 approved articles on Fark. But, I'm pretty sure half of them came before 2003 too.

Congrats! Keep up the good work with all your... um... inconsistancy.

[Slickster 0]

Rob, what is your name on Fark?

 

/farks as Slickster

[Guest MikeSC]

I have one simple question about this case.

Can she breath on her own?

Yes, she can.

-=Mike

[Guest Arnold_OldSchool]

WWF @ Detroit, MI - Joe Louis Arena - September 17, 1987

 

The Dingo Warrior pinned Terry Gibbs;

 

Warrior used Scandal's "The Warrior" as his entrance music for the bout

 

 

Now THAT's comedy

[2GOLD 0]

I have one simple question about this case.

Can she breath on her own?

Yes, she can.

-=Mike

 

Then what is the debate here?

If we turn off breathing machines and people stay alive, do we shove a pillow on their face until they stop?

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Imagine how the poll results might have turned out if ABC News had informed participants that in a sworn affidavit, registered nurse Carla Sauer Iyer, who worked at the Palm Garden of Largo Convalescent Center in Largo, Fla., while Terri Schiavo was a patient there, testified: "Throughout my time at Palm Gardens, Michael Schiavo was focused on Terri's death. Michael would say 'When is she going to die?' 'Has she died yet?' and 'When is that b---h gonna die?'"

 

Nurse Iyer's claims weren't even believed by the Schlinders.

 

Take that however you wish.

[NYU 0]

I have one simple question about this case.

Can she breath on her own?

Yes, she can.

-=Mike

 

Then what is the debate here?

If we turn off breathing machines and people stay alive, do we shove a pillow on their face until they stop?

Michael Schiavo says Terri did not want to live like this. He says that she had already previously made it clear that if she were in this kind of condition, she would want to die. Some people think Michael's intentions are pure, with him simply wanting to do what Terri had asked for. Others believe he has different motives here and that he will somehow benefit from Terri's death. The parents are saying Michael's testimony is false and that she should remain alive -- even if it may have actually been against her wishes. There's more here, but I'll spare you the excess details.

 

I don't see why you couldn't read through the first few pages of the thread to understand that.

 

And sorry, but a breathing machine is not much different than a feeding tube. Both are essential mechanical tools needed for someone to survive. Someone needing an artificial respirator will die if they do not have it. Someone needing a feeding tube will die if they do not have it. Mike can go on and on about how Terri has the ability do drink water and eat pudding/jello based on the testimony of a few nurses -- but there's testimony from other doctors and nurses that indicate this idea is false as well. So to take one side of that issue blindly without considering the other side of the issue is just absurd.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

On Jeb Bush ordering that the feeding tube go back into Terri in 2003:

 

"I feel for her --- but what legal right does Jeb have to do this?

 

Far as I can tell, he has NO legal standing whatsoever to issue this order."

 

Also in a 2003 Schiavo thread:

 

"And, as has been pointed out previously, the only people who have claimed to see ANY noticeable recognition on her part are her parents. The doctors and nurses have never seen any recognition by her."

 

So, which liberal said this?

 

MikeSC did!

 

(nothing like checking the old Schiavo threads on CE)

 

links:

 

http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...dpost&p=1068273

 

http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...dpost&p=1069140

[Vyce 0]

I don't see how anyone can call a feeding tube "artificial means of life". Its giving someone food. Something that controls her breathing...that is artificial life. She is being starved to death if dying of thirst doesn't kill her first. That is barbaric no matter how you want to try to look at it.

 

No one here can survive without food or water. If you cut off your supply of either you would die and it would be murder. How this is any different is beyond me.

Wow, you're not one of the people here I'd expect to be making that sort of argument.

 

People are killing the woman. They refuse to offer her any sustenance. If people do not like hearing what is actually happening, that is their problem.

 

Naw. At worst, maybe it's criminally negligent homicide.

 

But maybe INXS was right when he said Americans were murderers.

 

Or maybe he didn't so much as flat out say that as imply it.

 

I just googled Michelle Malkin, and I'm pretty sure she's out of her mind. She wrote a book about how racial profiling during WWII was a GOOD idea.

 

Well, it might have been.

 

The whole "interning all of the Nips in camps" thing went a little over the line, though.

 

Oddly enough, I'd still slip it to Michelle hard.

 

If you ask me, the media is fucking up coverage by reporting heresay as if it was fact.

 

 

Mike, you are aware of the irony of that statement, right?

 

Because you're basing your ENTIRE argument on the fact that her husband said she would not have wanted to live.

 

Stop - think a moment.

 

Her husband. Telling us. Something she said in the past.

 

Now go look up a definition of hearsay.

 

If we turn off breathing machines and people stay alive, do we shove a pillow on their face until they stop?

 

Give us a few years.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

Here's an interesting one: if someone is "allowed" to feed Terri orally (water, jello, whatever) and she can't swallow, so she chokes on it and dies, does that person get charged with manslaughter?

[NoCalMike 0]

If you ask me, the media is fucking up coverage by reporting heresay as if it was fact.

 

 

Mike, you are aware of the irony of that statement, right?

 

Because you're basing your ENTIRE argument on the fact that her husband said she would not have wanted to live.

 

Stop - think a moment.

 

Her husband.  Telling us.  Something she said in the past.

 

Now go look up a definition of hearsay.

 

 

Ok, fair enough, however that is hearsay that was credible enough to convince, what 20 court cases or so? That makes it easily more credible then random nurses who saw a picture or a ten second video clip of a balloon and want to claim Terry six months from being eligible for the next Special Olympics.

[2GOLD 0]

The point is, she is alive. That's the end of my story on this. I don't care what Mikey boy says she wanted. End of the day, the plan is to make a person who is living and breathing and let their own body eat them till they die. That is the "humane" idea I'm hearing tossed around.

 

I read the previous pages and at the end of the day, that is what is being asked to happen. Take a person breathing on their own and let their body eat them. Like I said, if she wrote it down then you could have shot her in the head for all I care about. You could have fed her corpse to sharks or giving it to people who were really into necro. If she wrote down, "hey, let my body eat me from the inside out till I stop breathing then spray me with acid", I'm all for it.

 

She didn't state it so I don't like the idea of letting her body eat itself on the word of her husband, who has got to be seeing her as an inconvience now. Not that her parents are anymore sane, they've got enough issues as well.

 

I've always been for people dying if that is what they want. Hey, write it down. Write it on a napkin, write it on a stone, hell write it out with silly string. I've had my stuff written out since I was 18 years old. It's not that difficult to write it down.