WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE? (page 7)

NewLight2

Howdy Eduardo,

First of all, Eduardo, didn't you just violate 'posting rule #1"?

Posting Guidelines
To ensure all users feel safe and keen to participate, please avoid:
1.Insulting, threatening or provoking language

Quote:
"NewLight2: YOU ARE JUST PLAIN RIDICULOUS!
I am just going to address a few things that you have (LIKE A MORON) said in this thread and a few other points:" -- Eduardo

Secondly, you mave misspelled Terri's name throughout your post. It is not "Terry", but 'Terri'.

Thirdly, you must have missed reading my post where I explained that the reason I linked to that article in my first post was because at the bottom of that article there were links to background information on Terri's situation. I was not endorsing everything that was printed in that first article, nor in any article that appears on the site.

I was in a rush to leave for work, so wanted a quick way to provide some background reference material for JWD visitors to read while I was away from my computer.

And, lastly, I will refrain from commenting on any more of your wrong assumptions about why I post the things I do.

Have a Good Day,

NewLight2

Oroborus21

Dear NL2:

I certainly do not want to offend you personally. I think what you said was ridiculous, whatever your true reasons or feelings and there fore that you were BEING ridiculous for saying such nonsense.

The posting policies are clear and easy to understand in terms of offensive or threatening language or posts, I think the term "insulting" is ambiguous. Anyone can find anything insulting if they are sensitive to it, I find the use of the term JDub or various macchinations of the name Jehovah ot be both offensive and insulting.

I am a person that calls things as I see them and anyone that asserts that the husband wants his wife to die because he wants to get away with something is being completely ridiculous, i.e. nonsensical. Bottom Line: if he is the cause or contributor of her condition, her death would only increase the penalty upon him, not make it lighter thus his interest and intention would be to keep her alive as long as possible.

-Eduardo

whyamihere

In my opinion it seems as if the Husband let go a long time ago. Her Parents did not. Let them have the authority over her. When you have a child in this world it is yours and you never give up on them. If their spouse does and you are willing to proceed and take care of them again then by all means let them. It is not a hard choice for them(her Parents). The choice has already been made to let her live. I think we should let it be and give her back to the person who loves and cares for her.

Brooke

NewLight2

Quote:
"Bottom Line: if he is the cause or contributor of her condition, her death would only increase the penalty upon him, not make it lighter thus his interest and intention would be to keep her alive as long as possible." -- -Eduardo

Unfortunitly, I doubt that is how he is thinking right now. But only he and Terri know the real truth about what happened that night. I just think that the courts have been wrong to prevent admission of that bone scan into the court records.

And I doubt very much if an autopsy will be preformed after her death and prior to her cremation. They already know that the cause of her death will be the result of having the feeding tube removed. She was NOT dying until they removed the feeding tube.

Can you provide written proof that there will indeed be an autopsy?

NewLight2

onacruse

Every human being [edit to add: and every animal and every plant and every bacterium] on this planet has died, including the Son of God.

Death is provably inevitable.

Why prolong the process?

whyamihere

Death is provably inevitable.

Why prolong the process?

Onacruse,

Do you have kids? If so put yourself in her Mothers shoes. Try and let go of your own Child.

Brooke

onacruse

Brooke:

Do you have kids? If so put yourself in her Mothers shoes. Try and let go of your own Child.

Yes, I have children; I also have parents, and a brother and other relatives about whom I deeply and intimately care.

Would I prefer to see any of them put through a modern medical sustaining procedure, simply and only to preserve the existence of their physical organism, even against their own expressed wishes?

No, no way, no way in hell.

In my opinion, to do such a thing amounts to nothing less than torture.

whyamihere

onacruse:

Well thats fine in how you think. Things can change as it really happens. Alot of this is easier said than done!

Brooke

onacruse

Brooke:

Things can change as it really happens. Alot of this is easier said than done!

I've given this a lot of thought, even as regarding myself.

For me: Kate knows what I desire at my deathbed.

For my parents: They have expressed their own desires to me, and as their lawfully designated executor, I will completely and unhesitatingly abide by their wishes.

So why is it "easier said than done"?

whyamihere

So why is it "easier said than done"?

As for your Children it is easier said then done. Bring them into this world is one thing. Taking them out is another. It would be a very hard choice for anyone to make. Not saying one is better than the other. Talking about your wishes is one thing. But making that choice for my child would be hard for me. I speak only of my own opinion and from my heart. So yes it is all good on paper and words but put in the situation is different and very real.

Brooke

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE TERRI SCHIAVO CASE?

Share this