MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 I don't see a feeding tube as a "machine" keeping her alive. They could manually put the food into her rather then having a machine do it. So if you have someone who is not physically able to feed themselves then it is OK to let them starve to death now? If you fed her manually, she'd choke on or aspirate food. The tube is basically keeping her alive.
BillsNYC Posted March 18, 2005 Author Posted March 18, 2005 Yeah BIllsNYC--and dont feed a baby/infant or dont feed a paralyzed person or dont feed a person without arms--and see if God thinks THEY should live or not.Come on. 280094[/snapback] Please, you don't have to feed a baby for 15 YEARS!! What do you call a guy with no arms and no legs hanging on a wall... Art
billsfanone Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 Yeah BIllsNYC--and dont feed a baby/infant or dont feed a paralyzed person or dont feed a person without arms--and see if God thinks THEY should live or not.Come on. 280094[/snapback] Good point. She should be a vegatable until she dies of natural causes.
Bishop Hedd Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 This is good because it puts an end to Bill Frist and Republican Senators' macabre and ghastly idea of subpeonaing Ms Schiavo to "testify" before the Senate. Just when you think they can't be more bizarre in their attempt to "preserve life" they top themselves.
Spikes16 Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/ Change in the story.....
CajunBillsBacker Posted March 18, 2005 Posted March 18, 2005 http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/ Change in the story..... 280172[/snapback] "Michael Schiavo says his wife told him she would not want to be kept alive artificially. Her parents dispute that, saying she could get better and that their daughter has laughed, cried, smiled and responded to their voices. " It's been 15 years! It's time to let her go. I understand as a parent, losing your child is the toughest thing that no one ever wants to face, but reality is, she's not gonna spring to her feet anytime in the future. They may not realize it now, but later on they will realize that it's for the best.
UConn James Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 Yeah BIllsNYC--and dont feed a baby/infant or dont feed a paralyzed person or dont feed a person without arms--and see if God thinks THEY should live or not.Come on. 280094[/snapback] There are some Christian whack jobs who did just that with their babies and buried them in the back yard. Teri's case, however, is an entirely different set of circumstances. Babies don't ask to be born. Teri asked her husband not to keep her alive like that. And what happened for 15 damn years was against her rationally stated wishes. I don't know what to think about the cosmos, but just like I say a few words every night for when anyone here asks for prayers, I'll be saying one for Teri. Godspeed.
IUBillsFan Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 This is good because it puts an end to Bill Frist and Republican Senators' macabre and ghastly idea of subpeonaing Ms Schiavo to "testify" before the Senate.Just when you think they can't be more bizarre in their attempt to "preserve life" they top themselves. 280148[/snapback] My question is why not just give her a lethal dose of morphine or something rather than letting her starve to death...Some people say she can't feel that but in talking to my wife , who's a neurologist, she says while they think that there is not way to be sure. Plain and simple by removing the tube they are going to let her die why not just do it quick?
HtownBillsFan Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 My question is why not just give her a lethal dose of morphine or something rather than letting her starve to death...Some people say she can't feel that but in talking to my wife , who's a neurologist, she says while they think that there is not way to be sure. Plain and simple by removing the tube they are going to let her die why not just do it quick? 280317[/snapback] I agree with you on this. If she is going to die, give her a lethal injection. By removing the feeding tube, she is going to starve to death. I saw that it may take up to ten days for her to die! I think that is inhumane!
e.e. Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 This is good because it puts an end to Bill Frist and Republican Senators' macabre and ghastly idea of subpeonaing Ms Schiavo to "testify" before the Senate.Just when you think they can't be more bizarre in their attempt to "preserve life" they top themselves. 280148[/snapback] god knows you are right. i wish politicians would spend more time protecting heinous murderers from execution instead of protecting innocent life. it is particularly important not to take any extraordinary measures in cases where the medical science is inexact and at this point truly unknowable. it is just obscene to take any extra measures to preserve an innocent life. damn it, her husband got his blood money and now he wants to move on. i say so be it-starve the B word, she's served her purpose.
Alaska Darin Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 god knows you are right. i wish politicians would spend more time protecting heinous murderers from execution instead of protecting innocent life. it is particularly important not to take any extraordinary measures in cases where the medical science is inexact and at this point truly unknowable. it is just obscene to take any extra measures to preserve an innocent life. damn it, her husband got his blood money and now he wants to move on. i say so be it-starve the B word, she's served her purpose. 280337[/snapback] Poorly typed but well said.
Bishop Hedd Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 My question is why not just give her a lethal dose of morphine or something rather than letting her starve to death...Some people say she can't feel that but in talking to my wife , who's a neurologist, she says while they think that there is not way to be sure. Plain and simple by removing the tube they are going to let her die why not just do it quick? 280317[/snapback] I wonder about that as well. I understand by pulling out her tube she could live for as long as another month. As a matter of fact I've also heard that her tube as been pulled out before, only to be ordered re-inserted by people like Jeb Bush and other self-appointed moralists.
John Adams Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 Poorly typed but well said. 280396[/snapback] He is e.e. [cummings?], after all.
Rubes Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 My question is why not just give her a lethal dose of morphine or something rather than letting her starve to death... 280317[/snapback] Because the concept of euthanasia is just too liberal for this country, that's why.
e.e. Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 Because the concept of euthanasia is just too liberal for this country, that's why. 280493[/snapback] lets explore that, ok? is it ok to euthanize a conscious creature? how about a morally aware creature? a defenseless, aware creature? it makes a difference, as medical science cant define where terri schiavo is definitively
e.e. Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 I wonder about that as well. I understand by pulling out her tube she could live for as long as another month. As a matter of fact I've also heard that her tube as been pulled out before, only to be ordered re-inserted by people like Jeb Bush and other self-appointed moralists. 280402[/snapback] you're right again------god damn all those who would try to protect the innocent- thk god u were always there to protect the innocent you fool eddie. what kind of a name is that anyway, ed hedd..in the pre irony age a bishop named ed hedd. classsic.
R. Rich Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 You must be confusing it w/ the full frontal lobotomy whereby a person loses their own personality and becomes a puppet for X front-organization. There's several of those. 279711[/snapback] Oh. <rimshot> Will you be here all week? Should people try the veal? 279711[/snapback] I was supposed to be here all week, but some guy from Connecticut just took my spot. They say his material is first rate.
R. Rich Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 That would require FNC to actually be in the process of dying. Unlike many left-tilted news networks, it is living quite fine without a feeding-tube. 279760[/snapback] Having a bias as far to the right as the rest of the media does to the left does not make you impartial. Really, did anyone honestly think that a news channel run by the former producer of Rush Limbaugh's TV show would be impartial?
UConn James Posted March 19, 2005 Posted March 19, 2005 Having a bias as far to the right as the rest of the media does to the left does not make you impartial. 280522[/snapback] Neither does dramatically turning their heads to Camera 2 in the middle of something that purports to be a news report, and saying "Now, here's what I think.... blah blah blah."
Recommended Posts