[goMac]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I'm not arguing that.

What I'm saying that I WISH would happen is that this woman be remanded to third party neutral custody and that they give her a good year of intensive therapy - physical and verbal - and then re-evaluate.

That's all.

She has BEEN IN THEREPY for the last 15 YEARS. Her brain is MOSTLY GONE. NO THEREPY WILL FIX THAT. She will NEVER GET BETTER. EVER.

If there was a chance at recovery, I think most of us would be happy to keep her alive, but there is no chance of recovery. She will the same 15 years from now as she is now. You can't fix something when it's missing entirely.

It's great your grandfather starved and suffered. That is different. Terri has no feeling. She cannot suffer. And seeing how assisted suicide is not very legal, starving is the only way it can be done. Because as far as I read, in Florida, killing someone by lethal injection (unless they are a criminal) is illegal. If you'd like to change the laws on assisted suicide, go ahead. Somehow I don't think you'd like that though.

[badidea]

It's moving, it's dancing, it's ALIVE............err, No! It's missing a fully functional human brain!

[vmpaul]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Also common-law married with children to another woman, who he cannot legally marry unless he divorces Terri or she dies. If he divorces her, it is unclear what will happen in terms of alimony or other financial support, but if she dies that not only does this not occur but he stands to gain a significant amount from her insurance.

This is someone with extremely strong emotional and financial reasons for wanting her to die, and you say this is not a conflict of interest?

It's been argued that his strong emotional reason is because he wants to see his wife's wishes be fulfilled. As far as the financial side of it, I've heard many conflicting stories on this. At the very least, there's enough doubt to keep me from demonizing the guy the way he's been treated here and in the conservative press. In the end I would side with the fact that this has been reviewed by the courts to their satisfaction.

Anyway, some interesting commentary by Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan - some excerpts (bolded emphasis mine):

It's been a fascinating few days, watching today's Republicans grapple with their own internal contradictions. It's been clear now for a while that the religious right controls the base of the Republican party, and that fiscal left-liberals control its spending policy. That's how you develop a platform that supports massive increases in debt and amending the Constitution for religious right social policy objectives. But the Schiavo case is breaking new ground. For the religious right, states' rights are only valid if they do not contradict religious teaching. So a state court's ruling on, say, marriage rights or the right to die, or medical marijuana, must be over-ruled - either by the intervention of the federal Congress or by removing the authority of judges to rule in such cases, or by a Constitutional amendment. Fred Barnes, a born-again Christian conservative makes the point succinctly here:

"True, there is an arguable federalism issue: whether taking the issue out of a state's jurisdiction is constitutional. But it pales in comparison with the moral issue."

You can't have a clearer statement of the fact that religious right morality trumps constitutional due process. Of course it does. The religious right recognizes one ultimate authority: their view of God. The constitution is only valid in so far as it reflects His holy law.

......

The case also highlights - in another wonderful irony - how religious right morality even trumps civil marriage. It is simply amazing to hear the advocates of the inviolability of the heterosexual civil marital bond deny Terri Schiavo's legal husband the right to decide his wife's fate, when she cannot decide it for herself. Again, the demands of the religious right pre-empt constitutionalism, federalism, and even the integrity of the family. When conservatism means breaking up the civil bond between a man and his wife, you know it has ceased to be conservative. But we have known that for a long time now. Conservatism is a philosophy without a party in America any more. It has been hijacked by zealots and statists.

It's amazing the vitriol this issue has spawned on this forum. I haven't seen this kind of emotion in regard to any other issue.

I'm glad people, on both sides, have a place to discuss and vent.

[Cody Dawg]

Florida Department of Children and Families going to remove Terri?

I am in Florida and this is on our local news station - interrupted regular programming.

Looks like they are going to go in there and get her out even if by force.

I hope so.

[zerostar]

Just great.

How about later, perhaps, Delay can put his hand up her rectum and parade her around like a political puppet.

This is sad and totally against this woman's wishes.

[Mithras]

So Cody, when do you start the campaign to overturn Bush's 1999 Texas law that allows individuals, families, or hospitals to choose to remove artificial nutrition & hydration tubes?

(To everyone else: I'm sorry. I don't know why I keep trying to find some consistency or reason in this character; I should know better than to extend the thread unnecessarily.)

[itai195]

Wow, 15 pages. Well I've refrained so far, but my only two cents on this issue that are worth sharing are my shock at the hypocrisy of the right. The supposed defenders of marriage and the rule of law want to villify a clearly loving husband and deny him his right, under the law, to determine the proper care for his spouse. The supposed defenders of individual liberty, free from government interference, want to butt in on what's clearly a family issue. At least if I ever have to make such a decision for a parent or spouse, I can take solace in the fact that Congress may butt in and turn my loved one into the political hot potato du jour. My apologies to the thousands of other families in similar circumstances who apparently don't deserve so much attention. My apologies also to the poor folks in Texas who, thanks to George W Bush, may have their 'right to life' subjugated to a much more important principle -- their ability to pay.

And we're getting lectured on ethics by Tom DeLay. What a steaming pile of manure this whole situation is. For anyone who thought the right doesn't kowtow to their religious base, here's your proof.

With this latest development, following the steroid hearings last week, I don't think my opinion of Congress has ever sunk so low.

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Looks like they are going to go in there and get her out even if by force.

I hope so.

[waxcrash]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Florida Department of Children and Families going to remove Terri?

I am in Florida and this is on our local news station - interrupted regular programming.

Looks like they are going to go in there and get her out even if by force.

I hope so.

You still here? Please go away.

[saddino]

Originally posted by vmpaul (quote from andrewsullivan.com):
The religious right recognizes one ultimate authority: their view of God. The constitution is only valid in so far as it reflects His holy law.

And amazingly, while the religious right frets about Iraqis setting up a government based on Islamic law, they make all efforts to bend our own government to Christian law.

The irony would be humorous if it wasn't so frightening.

[Cody Dawg]

waxcrash
You still here? Please go away.

In case you hadn't noticed -> <- I started the thread. YOU "go away."

[goMac]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
In case you hadn't noticed -> <- I started the thread. YOU "go away."

You've nicely ignored my reply noting the only legal way to end her life is to starve her...

Originally posted by goMac:
You've nicely ignored my reply noting the only legal way to end her life is to starve her...

Don't feel bad. She's ignored a lot more than that in this thread.

[zerostar]

Followup: "Florida Department of Children and Families plans to pay millions upon millions of dollars to Michael Schiavo in civil lawsuit resulting from their illegal abuse of governmental power and civil rights."

[Cody Dawg]

Yeah, it's nice to see people invent the news as they go along.



I hope they pull her out of there today. That's why I'm glad Jeb Bush is running the state - and his brother is president. You can bet they're exploring all options right now. This DCF thing might just work even if only temporarily.

I'm not sure if they can pull it off, but they can try.

They, like a lot of us advocating for Terri's right-to-live, want to err on the side of caution and preserve life, I suspect.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Yeah, it's nice to see people invent the news as they go along.



I hope they pull her out of there today. That's why I'm glad Jeb Bush is running the state - and his brother is president. You can bet they're exploring all options right now. This DCF thing might just work even if only temporarily.

I'm not sure if they can pull it off, but they can try.

They, like a lot of us advocating for Terri's right-to-live, want to err on the side of caution and preserve life, I suspect.

And you're missing the point that according to United States law Michael has the right to do this.

Apparently the Bush's like to make up laws as they go along.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by vmpaul:
It's been argued that his strong emotional reason is because he wants to see his wife's wishes be fulfilled.

In which case, he would have strong emotional reasons on both sides; that does not resolve the conflict. However, the evidence is very much against your assertion anyway. Although he has occasionally cited 'respecting her wishes' as the reason why he is doing this, by his own admission it has never been his only reason, or even his primary reason. Exactly what these other reasons are have changed over time, but at times he has even stated his primary reason as revenge against her parents.

As far as the financial side of it, I've heard many conflicting stories on this. At the very least, there's enough doubt to keep me from demonizing the guy the way he's been treated here and in the conservative press.

There should, however, be enough doubt to not canonize him. The blind faith people have put in this man's word is impressive, given the scanty evidence he has to back up any assertion that the conflict of interest should be ignored.

[waxcrash]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
In case you hadn't noticed -> <- I started the thread. YOU "go away."

Sorry to get personal, but no one else has the balls to say it�

Were you born annoying or did you gradually become this way? You started out here as iWrite but you were so annoying that you had to change user names to Cody Dawg. Now you are doing the same thing as Cody Dawg. You ignore facts and post highly offensive comments comparing the Holocaust to Terri Schiavo. You are entitled to your opinions, but as others have mentioned, the Holocaust comment was the last straw and uncalled for. Please, for the sake of everyone here, put your kid in daycare and get a day job. Or get some friends that you can discuss daily events with. Don't you have a kid to take care of?

[I apologize to the other MacNN members for the Ca$h style rant.]

[Edit: added the emoticon.]

[Cody Dawg]

I like what you had to say Millenium. You keep repeating that the husband's motive as suspect - which no one can dispute.

[zerostar]

Originally posted by waxcrash:
Were you born annoying or did you gradually become this way?

My guess? Typical Repug FL house-mom with too much time on her hands and no REAL opinion of her own. Posting here in between Junior League meeting and community events. Gets her jollys from blatantly ignoring the intelligent posts and repeating the same rhetoric over and over.

[saddino]

I like what you had to say zerostar. You keep repeating that Cody's motives are suspect - which no one can dispute.

[Cody Dawg]

You're wrong. I'll leave it at that. WAY off base.



Think more along the lines of Laura Ingraham and you'll be much closer (in looks, political interests, and ideals.)

[zerostar]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
You keep repeating that the husband's motive as suspect - which no one can dispute.

Of course you would give a thumbs-up, this is your style of argument, repeating over and over the most mundane details until they become more important than they are.

So his motives are suspect, he is not on trial here, the fact is independent members have verified her wishes. she has ZERO chance of recover and will only degrade to worse state over time.

This has been ruled on time and time again, and now too many people are stepping in and making it a huge circus, any dignity she had left has been used for political motivation, glad to see it is backfiring on them somewhat.

[zerostar]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
and you'll be much closer (in looks, political interests, and ideals.)

Wow, shes pretty fugly so good luck with that. Also Ideals imply an original thought process, I don't think you are capable, sorry.

[zerostar]

Originally posted by saddino:
I like what you had to say zerostar. You keep repeating that Cody's motives are suspect - which no one can dispute.

haha

Nice dino btw, that sig made me laugh. then cry.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
You're wrong. I'll leave it at that. WAY off base.



Think more along the lines of Laura Ingraham and you'll be much closer (in looks, political interests, and ideals.)

You really have a fixation with your looks, don't you? I can't recall you making a post involving self-description without mentioning your looks somehow. Are they really that important to you?

[budster101]

Glad to see someone is going to be fighting the good fight!

[Cody Dawg]

I'm fixated with a lot of things, but not my looks.

My point is that I'm not some jewelry-wearing designer-duds soccer mom - though, I must say, I find women like that curiously refreshing since they are raising the next generation of Republicans.



One of the main problems with liberals is that they have a short attention span and a problem staying on task: When things don't go their way they resort to badmouthing people.

Typical.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I like what you had to say Millenium. You keep repeating that the husband's motive as suspect - which no one can dispute.

Of course you also ignored he mentioned Terri's family has their own motivations that aren't exactly neutral too...

I think, yes, Michael wants to get on with his life. I don't think he has some massive 15 year plot to murder her or collect insurance money. Face it, Terri is gone, Michael knows this. I'm assuming that Terri would want him to move on with his life if she died, either physically or in spirit.

[Cody Dawg]

Terri would have wanted him to have divorced her - long before he moved in with another woman and had two kids with her.

Said woman, by the way, that he had an affair with while he was married to Terri.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I hope they pull her out of there today. That's why I'm glad Jeb Bush is running the state - and his brother is president.

Because they ignore the laws of your nation?

[Mithras]

Well, the full appeals court rejected the Schindler's case 10-2.
Who knew that Florida and Georgia had so many culture-of-death liberal activist judges? That would willfully disregard the clear wishes of the U.S. Congress and apply the law rather than political pandering?
Thank God for George and Jeb Bush, true men of strong principle, who believe not in the law but the Law.

[goMac]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Terri would have wanted him to have divorced her - long before he moved in with another woman and had two kids with her.

Said woman, by the way, that he had an affair with while he was married to Terri.

Great. He had an affair. That doesn't change Terri is pretty much dead. Michael isn't married to Terri anymore. He's married to the body that used to contain Terri. It is well within his legal right to stand up for her and carry out her wishes. She will never get better. If there is anything at all left in her, I would assume it is in a lot of agony over having most of its brain turned to liquid. This isn't curable stuff. Even if there is anything left in her, wouldn't you want that put out of its suffering? No ammount of food would ever fix that suffering.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I'm fixated with a lot of things, but not my looks.

My point is that I'm not some jewelry-wearing designer-duds soccer mom - though, I must say, I find women like that curiously refreshing since they are raising the next generation of Republicans.

That still doesn't explain why the first item in your list of comparisons to another person is looks.

We are having a discussion where one's ideals and political beliefs are of paramount importance. And yet, when you draw a comparison to another person you mention looks first. Why is that?

[waxcrash]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
That's why I'm glad Jeb Bush is running the state - and his brother is president. You can bet they're exploring all options right now.

I'm glad that our government is a separation of powers with a system of checks and balances. When the legislative branch and executive branch try to meddle in private family matters, the judicial branch can stop them.

[Mithras]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I hope they pull her out of there today. That's why I'm glad Jeb Bush is running the state - and his brother is president. You can bet they're exploring all options right now.

You will be disappointed to learn that the President (who, remember, signed into law a bill permitting individuals, their families, and even their hospitals to decide to withdraw artificial nutrition & hydration) has no further plans beyond the grandstanding over the weekend:

WACO, Texas�_Mar 23, 2005 —�_President Bush suggested Wednesday that he and Congress had done their best to help Terri Schiavo's parents prolong her life, and the White House said it has no further legal options.

"We felt like the actions taken with Congress was the best course of action," Bush said.
...
White House spokesman Scott McClellan later said, "There really are not other legal options available to us."

"We have explored all our options previously," McClellan said.
...
Asked what avenues might remain, Bush said, "Now we'll watch the courts make (their) decisions. But we looked at all options from the executive branch perspective."

"This is an extraordinary and sad case," he added.

[Captain Obvious]

On my fckng god, is this still thread still open.


1) You can not compare the doorstop to prisoners. Much less the treatment of them by the state.

2) It was more common for Jews to die from various forms of execution than from starvation during the holocaust.

3) Any of you judging husbands motives is POINTLESS unless you are a judge in Florida. His motives are irrelevant in this case since they are to be judged outside the scope of her hearings, his right to be power of attorney has to be decided long before they get to this point otherwise it would have been stripped and we wouldn�t be here.

4) Hey moron, it is not based on insurance despite what the stupid blog you read tells you. The Advance Directives Act of 1999 can be researched in all of three seconds and when you run into the full text of the bill you find out it is a little more complex than what you were lead to believe. Furthermore, a patient�s care is often intervened upon by various hospital boards in the best interests of the patient because the family is unable or unwilling to take the proper steps to insure it happens. If someone had their life-support pulled you can be sure it was not done because of their inability to pay the bills. These hospital boards are not made up of people from the accounting department. I used to sleep with some bioethicist chick who sat on boards like this and despite her signing a non-disclosure agreement I assure you from what I was told the events that transpire and are judged have nothing to do with a patient�s financial situation.

In closing, the doorstop is going to expire soon. Even the people in Washington who you think are more obsessed than you over the issue know that. They just want to go on record saying they tired to do the moral thing. They don�t want her around anymore than I do but for them the issue is a growing liability the longer she is around.

This case isn�t really a big deal since it happens all the time. And the situation we are in should be blamed on the media who hyped a four year old story so much that retards like iWrite finally picked up on in and forced the hand of their legislators to get involved which just encouraged the journalists to run with the story again and again.

[Mithras]

Originally posted by Captain Obvious:
I used to sleep with some bioethicist chick who sat on boards like this and despite her signing a non-disclosure agreement I assure you from what I was told the events...

OT: Oh, the irony.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Mithras:
Well, the full appeals court rejected the Schindler's case 10-2.
Who knew that Florida and Georgia had so many culture-of-death liberal activist judges? That would willfully disregard the clear wishes of the U.S. Congress and apply the law rather than political pandering?
Thank God for George and Jeb Bush, true men of strong principle, who believe not in the law but the Law.

Looks like more than half of those "liberal activist judges" were appointed by Republican Presidents ...

[Arty50]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I like what you had to say Millenium. You keep repeating that the husband's motive as suspect - which no one can dispute.

No one can dispute that his motives may be suspect, nor can anyone dispute that his motives may be pure. That's one of the big reasons this whole debate is completely retarded. You don't know him. You just know what you've seen on TV or read on the internet.

If I had a 1/2 cent for everytime someone in my family made a bad assumption about the reason another family member did something, I'd be richer than Bill Gates.

People get way too caught up into figuring out why other people do things. And without fail, they never bother to actually ask the person why they did it. Instead it's always done behind the person's back or from the bleachers. And as such, it always leads to disharmony and discord. Which is really sad when the initial action was meant to be harmless or, worse, was just plain misunderstood.

The bottom line is that you and I can only speculate as to what Terri Schiavo's motivation is. So until you actually meet him in person and see what kind of man he is, please don't tell me that you know what his reasoning is.

However, the courts have met him in person. He has been deposed, testified, and cross examined. So they're way ahead of you.

[bstone]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Yeah, it's nice to see people invent the news as they go along.

Taking lead from you, Cody Dawg.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Terri would have wanted him to have divorced her - long before he moved in with another woman and had two kids with her.

Said woman, by the way, that he had an affair with while he was married to Terri.

So even if he's morally bankrupt for you, he still is the person (as husband) who is to decide under these circumstances.

That his life didn't stop and he now has a family of his own, doesn't matter. (And I don't think you know that Terri would have wanted her husband to do, neither does any of us.) AFAIK he was offered money (I heard several million dollars) by the parents and their supporters to divorce, so if he was just in for the money, he would have taken it.

I think (and I think we can agree on this), Terri's husbands is as much convinced that what he does is right as you are that it's wrong. Period. And the thing is that all (!) courts so far agreed with Mr. Schiavo.

[ebuddy]

Originally posted by bstone:
What is sick is the amount of time, money and effort which has gone into denying this woman her wishes.

Why would her wishes have changed from wanting a long life before the awarding of a couple million, to death after the couple million??? Could someone please answer me what her wishes are and when we knew them??? Thanx.

[ebuddy]

Originally posted by OreoCookie:
So even if he's morally bankrupt for you, he still is the person (as husband) who is to decide under these circumstances.

Unless polygamy is legal in the State of Florida, I don't think he's her husband first of all. Second of all, to decide what? What Terri wanted in this case? Her desire for life or death seems to hinge on the awarding of a couple million dollars.

[OreoCookie]

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Unless polygamy is legal in the State of Florida, I don't think he's her husband first of all. Second of all, to decide what? What Terri wanted in this case? Her desire for life or death seems to hinge on the awarding of a couple million dollars.

Last time I checked, Mr. Schiavo is still married to Mrs. Schiavo. He never divorced from Terri and also never married his new partner.

As for the second question, I was replying to Cody Dawg's comment that `she wouldn't want him to be with another woman and have a family.' Nobody knows what she wanted, and because cerebral cortex isn't working anymore, we won't ever find out.

[saddino]

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Could someone please answer me what her wishes are and when we knew them??? Thanx.

According to the ruling:

There are no written declarations by Terri Schiavo as to her intention with regard to this issue. Therefore, the court is left with oral declarations allegedly made to parties and non-parties as to her feelings on this subject. The testimony before this court reveals that she made comments or statements to five (5) persons, including her husband and her mother.

...They (statements) reflect underlying values of independence, quality of life, not to be a burden and so forth. "Hooked to a machine" means they do not want life artifically extended when there is no hope of improvement.

[ironknee]

i was reminded that most of us have gone through this before with Karen Ann Quinlan in the mid 70's when she drank alcohol and valium_and went into a coma...eventually her parents won the right to take her off life support system.

Terri should have the same right to die with dignity_...i don't understand the religious right's (oops sorry to be redundant) point of view...IF there is a heaven why not let her go?

Little by little, the religious right wants to turn the 21st century into a second Christian age...oh btw, the first christian age was what we call the Dark ages.

just dumb

[Mithras]

best. sig. evar.
What's with that symbolism, anyway? I don't get it -- "Life is censoring me!" "Life is the Duct Tape of Oppression!" It makes no sense.
If they wanted to wear T-shirts like they were life, and then write "judges" on the tape or something, it would at least be coherent.

P.S. You can find really weird stuff googling "censorship tape mouth".

[Moderator]

Signed by GW

Under Texas law, hospitals can cease to feed a patient whose prognosis is so poor that further care would be futile if that patient has no way to pay his or her medical expenses.

A baby was pulled of life support under that legislation this past week, against his mother�s wishes.

atta boy Georgie!

[ironknee]

Originally posted by Mithras:
best. sig. evar.
What's with that symbolism, anyway? I don't get it -- "Life is censoring me!" "Life is the Duct Tape of Oppression!" It makes no sense.
If they wanted to wear T-shirts like they were life, and then write "judges" on the tape or something, it would at least be coherent.

P.S. You can find really weird stuff googling "censorship tape mouth".

YEah I don't understand it...is it saying they are censored for saying life???? it's not clear what it means...kinda like "fuzzy math" i guess