How sad that you do not celebrate diversity of thought and belief.
The monolithic thought I have observed on this topic is best exhibited by those who worship the Ominpotent Judiciary.
You still haven’t answered the question.
Was Terri Schiavo a human being?
Yeah, I’ve noticed you tend to address only the least substantive posts. It’s easier than addressing the tough ones, eh? And then you massively misrepresent what people say, because it’s much easier to dismiss a judge-worshipper than to dismiss a real person with a real argument. Very solipsistic.
Was she homo sapiens? Sure, absolutely, although the Latin was a misnomer in this case. What’s your point?
If you’re not asking us to correct choose her species, I’m afraid you’ll need to clarify what you’re asking.
Daniel
Your irrelevant question has been answered by many.
Your lack of honesty has been observed by all.
The omnipotent judiciary is a figment of your imagination. Further, your perception of the entire Schaivo case is delusional as well.
At this point I am thinking you’re getting quite a sick charge out of this and I feel profoundly sorry for you and anyone who has to deal with you directly.
Respecting the diversity of thought and belief does not require respecting the “belief” that 2+2 = 5.
B’loney.
What you have just described is a belief system: that a serverely disabled human life is not worth living.
That is a value judgement. Not a scientific fact.
You are perfectly free to document this in you own Living Will, but I will thank you not to impose your Belief System on those who dare to disagree with it.
Then what do we call causing the death of a non-terminal human being who has not been convicted of a capital crime and sentenced to the death penalty?
I’m not asking you to respect a mathematically inaccurate equation.
I am asking that you respec that not all of us agree to a secular view that a severely disabled human being is somehow not worthy of life.
Unless their name is Terri Schiavo, in which case you feel you have the right to disregard her wishes and sentence her to living death.
Who is this supposed to be?
Is there any way that you can go back to being a lurker? Your proud ignorance is most distasteful, and sadly out of place here. Anyone who believes that the judiciary has acted “omnipotently” is pathetically mistaken(and that’s not just my “fear” of you talking). The judiciary acted judiciously, rendered hundreds of decisions all in-line with the law-not non secularly as you wish they did-and the other side came out on top, thankfully for all of us who wish not to end up in a PVS until the day our insurance runs out.
Sam
No. We do not know what Terri would have wanted, unless you happen to believe her husband instead of her parents and siblings. It is your perogative to believe Michael just as it is mine to disbelieve him.
“This” is Terri - the woman who was euthanized by the state.
If we are going to practice euthanasia, let us at least be honest about what it is and employ a humane method.
An you are intolerant of difference of opinion.
Just like most of the Left. Freedom of speech only as long as everyone agrees with you.
She wasn’t “severely disabled,” you blithering twit! SHE WAS DEAD!!!
And had been dead for fifteen years. What lay in that bed was a corpse that could breathe. Why is it so hard for you to understand that the poor human being named Terri left us a decade and a half ago and her husk was little more than a teddy bear for her parents? Why are you so filled with hate that you spread lies and deny the truth?
You are not merely sadistically, stubbornly stupid, you revel in your sadistic, stubborn stupidity. You enjoy telling horrible lies about Terri’s husband while ignoring every FACT that is laid before you.
You are sick. Evil and sick. Find another message board to spread your filth on.
Wow. I didn’t know corpses could breathe unassisted.
That’s a new one.
When there is a dispute, we rely on the courts to determine the truth. I respect our court system; why do you hate America?
Which is neither here nor there. The proper venue for settling this kind of dispute is the courts, through due process.
You have been misinformed. She was not sentenced to death, it was her legally protected wish to decline medical intervention. What is it about personal freedom of choice that frightens you so?
Do you think George Bush stole the election with the help of the Supreme Court?
Do you think all murderers on death row are guilty?
And we are never, ever to question the reasonability of a court decision.
Do you think OJ was innocent?
What is it about respecting an individual’s right to live that frightens you?
What is it about the state euthanizing an innocent severely disabled woman that makes you feel all warm and tingly and fuzzy inside?
You are aware that the majority of Republican voters agree with the court’s decision, aren’t you? This isn’t a partisan issue, and many of the people disagreeing with you in this thread are far from liberal. Your repeated attempts to spin it as such do little to help your credibility.
I’m not surprised that people have resorted to flinging insults at you, Wonderwench - clearly, flinging facts at you has done no good. You continue, despite mountains of proof to the contrary, to insist that it was Michael Schiavo and Michael Schiavo alone who provided evidence stating that Terri would not have wanted to be kept on life support. You continue, despite mountains of proof to the contrary, to insist that there was reasonable doubt that Terri Schiavo was in a Persistent Vegetative State with no hope of recovery. There was not. You continue, despite mountains of proof to the contrary, to state that Terri Schiavo’s parents were not given a chance to prove their case in court. They were. In short, you fail to provide any sort of proof of your claims, refuse to consider any evidence which would prove you wrong, and will not engage in any sort of reasonable debate. You accuse anyone who tries to debate you of intolerance and claim that they support the euthanasia of the severely disabled. What possible reason could any of us have to even try continuing to reach you?
I’ll make you a deal, Wonderwench. Present your argument, without hyperbole, and with every citation, fact, and tidbit of information you can muster. I will, in return, present my argument, without hyperbole or insult, and with every citation, fact, and tidbit of information I can muster. I will listen to you if you will listen to me. What do you say?
I’m not espousing a political party’s beliefs - I am stating my own personal beliefs.
I don’t care if I am among a majority, a minority or standing on my own. I am going to stay true to my core values.
As I said in the other thread, none of us here are going to convince someone else that his worldview/values are wrong. I believe the state euthanized a defenseless disabled woman. You don’t. I can respect your right to hold your belief while disagreeing with it.
Sadly, most of the people in this thread are only able to accept the right of anyone to hold an opinion as long as they are all in agreement.
Frankly, I dislike the idea of any major issue in our society being given kneejerk compliance without discussion or disagreement. Testing the moral boundaries is healthy and useful.
Just to repeat myself:
There is absolutely nothing to be gained by ever engaging wonderwench and lekatt. Save your time, breath, and sanity and ignore every lie that comes out of their mouth. You’ll thank me for it later.
Um, dear, if they are murderers, as you said, then they have committed murder.