Not only that, but they had to halt classes at a nearby elementary school so the kids wouldn’t have to see the throngs of protestors with nasty signs.
I apologise then. There’s enough people that are saying that honestly that sadly, you weren’t over the top enough to be over the top!
I’ve also gotten in trouble by not including smileys to indicate sarcasm; it can be hard to wink with text, if you know what I mean.
Another thing that bugs me–the AP stories that I read about this (I usually get my news from Yahoo) have consistently repeated, early in the story, Mr. Schindler’s statements that Terri responds to them. Their headline for much of the day yesterday was something like “Parents Say Schiavo Weakened but Alert”.
Don’t you think they have a responsibility to challenge this somewhat? I mean, their story is not inaccurate, because all they’re saying is that they say she’s responding. But IMO, they’re fueling the fire by perpetuating the idea that Terri is capable of responding to them, even if they do make some weak refutations late in the article.
This is one of the biggest problems with the media, IMO; when one side of a debate is spouting nothing but bullshit, they still feel obligated to be “balanced” rather than call bullshit. It is apparent to anyone who understands what a flat EEG means, or to anyone who listened to that ghastly audio clip that was released, that Terri does NOT respond to her parents. The media should be finding out the truth and reporting it, but instead it would be something like, “Schiavo’s Parents, Husband Differ on Responsiveness”.
It was the same story with the neurologists; the headline would be, “Experts Disagree on Schiavo’s Diagnosis”, but when you read the story you have the opinions of a legion of well-respected neurologists who have examined Terri who say she is in a PVS and a few documented quacks and charlatans who haven’t examined her saying that she isn’t. There is no obligation to treat these sides as if they are equivalent, but they do anyway.
I’m still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that people are concerned that a woman who is physically unable to swallow may wind up addicted to morphine. 
So far, even though it feels like I’ve wrapped my mind into something resembling an explosion in a pretzel factory, I haven’t succeeded.
CJ
I read that and didn’t get a glimmer of sarcasm. Sometimes I manage to forget what a reactionary conservative Stein is.
A quick survey of the contents of the rest of the site indicate that no, he’s quite serious.
I can’t beleive he is letting himself be such a tool for this batch of idiots. And for him to play the Nazi card is just unbelievable. I had some respect for him until I read that. Sadly no sarcasam, all rant not facts, just like the rest of this new "culture-of-life"industry. BASTARDS!
I commented on something like this several pages back. How is it possible after all these years of tests and EEGs that her family is still so certain that she’s alert and responsive? What are they thinking when they see the flat EEG?
Obviously, they’re delusional, but how is it that after 15 years that no one has pulled her parents aside and laid it all out and said, “I’m sorry, but this is it, you have to realize she’s never going to get better” ? Do they write those doctors off as cracks and find one that tells them what they want to hear?
DoctorJ, it’s easier to be ‘balanced’ than rational. That is perhaps the first thing you should understand about the mainstream newsmedia, as opposed to the party-political propaganda organs. It’s easier to compile the prepared rantings of both sides into an article than to sit down and make judgements.
If you go deeper, however, the newspapers equate balance with professionalism and, therefore, avoiding hate mail and a loss of readership. In an ideal world, the newspaper would be a reporting of the facts, including factual reportage about the statements made by all sides of a given issue. The paper’s editorial voice would be completely silent in normal copy. That is what they are aiming for. I think it’s a goal worth striving towards, but it is very hard to accomplish if you also need to avoid hate mail and keep a readership, not to mention the damned deadlines. (It’s damned hard to accomplish even if you don’t have those concerns, to be honest.)
Due to a combination of laziness and a deadline (it’s easier to type in a press release than think up your own copy) and the desire to avoid sounding as dry as the stock market report (we need readers, after all) you end up with the most vocal and radical side, the side with the best press releases and soundbites, dictating the largest amount of the content verbatim, with the editor/flack typing in some weak rebuttals from the other side to avoid the image of impropriety.
I don’t read the mainstream news much these days, unless I have the energy to focus on an issue and do my own research.
Latest news is Jesse Jackson will join the protestors. I guess the lure of all those cameras was too much for him.
DoctorJ, I have a question for you. Is Terri a candiate for organ donation? I understand she’s partially blind, so I think her corneas are out, but what about her other organs?
Not answering for DoctorJ but I really hope they don’t use her organs for anything. The next slogan would be: “They starved her to death and then broke her down for spare parts!”
Regards
Testy
Well, if any of her organs are viable, couldn’t they take comfort in the fact that she “lives on” in other people?
Rational people might, but these folks don’t seem to qualify. I see screams of “They killed her for parts,” more readily than a calm, “She lives on through helping others.”
I seriously doubt if any of her organs will be suitable for transplant after being subjected to prolonged lack of nutrition and hydration. Wasn’t that the whole point, to cause her organs to fail so she would die?
Hence, my question for a Doper Doc. I thought that might be the reason, but I don’t know if an organ that “shuts down” doesn’t mean it can’t be “restarted” in another person.
Probably not. Between her original incident, the years of being sustained on tube feedings, the multiple illnesses during that time, and her manner of death, it isn’t likely that any of her organs will be in good enough shape to transplant.
In other news. The schindlers are now refusing to eat any eggs, fearing that there is a live chick inside just trying to get out. 
Yes, but according to John Edward the chicks inside actually want to be eaten, so it’s OK.
As to organ donation, it is extremely doubtful that solid organs like the heart, kidneys and pancreas would be considered for transplantation owing to the manner of death and likelihood of damage. Other tissues like bone, cartilage, tendons and heart valves might be useful.
Do they transplant bone?
Wouldn’t her bones be too fragile for transplant? Remember, she has had several broken bones during the past few years, (due to Michael beating her as she lay in her hospital bed, of course. :rolleyes: )