Death to Terry Shivo

[Shane W]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?

We talk about how wonderful it is that we can spare our pets their pain towards the end of their life, and yet we demonize this SAME MERCY towards human beings, so MUCH that we can't even bring ourselves to euthanize this woman... we have to let her body dehydrate itself. She can't feel it, she doesn't know what's going on, but I think it'd be easier for all involved if they could just give her the fucking 'pink shot'.

That's the exact thing that's bugging me.

[Kensington]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

[Yano]

I wouldn't have much logic to provide the argument, or reasons to explain why I feel the way I do, but I think they should just let her go. If the same thing happened to me, I'd want that to happen - that's not living.

[gwyllgi]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.


Shane- I am all for euthanzation. But since the people of the United States of America are too fucking stupid, too blind, and too cruel to allow such a thing, the best thing to do is to let her die. Imagine if you were in her place. Would you want that existance? Would you want that to be the memory people are left with?

I certainly wouldn't.

[RunawayMichael]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.


Shane- I am all for euthanzation. But since the people of the United States of America are too fucking stupid, too blind, and too cruel to allow such a thing, the best thing to do is to let her die. Imagine if you were in her place. Would you want that existance? Would you want that to be the memory people are left with?

I certainly wouldn't.


I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.

Some people who are perfectly congnitive don't want their existence. Being suicidal, for instance. Does that mean we should let them kill themselves?

[Shane W]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.


Shane- I am all for euthanzation. But since the people of the United States of America are too fucking stupid, too blind, and too cruel to allow such a thing, the best thing to do is to let her die. Imagine if you were in her place. Would you want that existance? Would you want that to be the memory people are left with?

I certainly wouldn't.

I'm for euthanasia also, but with a limit. In this case, I fell in my gut that letting her go is for the best. BUT, I'll keep saying it, euthanasia without an advanced directive is a dangerous precedent.

[Kensington]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.
Well, I thought you were writing specifically about this thread. I agree that those who shout "murder" are being unhelpfully inflammatory. The more I read about Michael Schiavo, the less comfortable I am with the more inflammatory things that have been said about him in various outlets. I don't think he should be demonized; of course, I think demonizing her parents is pretty contemptible, too.

The fact remains, however, that regardless of whatever moral judgment you or anyone else attaches to the word or concept of "killing," "killing" quite literally does not mean "murdering." For example, Robert Blake "murdered" his wife, and Matthew Broderick "killed" a man in an accident back in the late 1980s. Lee Harvey Oswald "murdered" John F. Kennedy, and my friend Tim "killed" a guy who ran out in front of his car.

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.

[Kensington]

I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.
I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.

[Taxman]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.


Shane- I am all for euthanzation. But since the people of the United States of America are too fucking stupid, too blind, and too cruel to allow such a thing, the best thing to do is to let her die. Imagine if you were in her place. Would you want that existance? Would you want that to be the memory people are left with?

I certainly wouldn't.

I'm for euthanasia also, but with a limit. In this case, I fell in my gut that letting her go is for the best. BUT, I'll keep saying it, euthanasia without an advanced directive is a dangerous precedent.

Sadly it is a descision that must be made every day.

[Jamie Howdeshell]

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.

it is exactly like turning off a ventilator. what are you talking about?

[Bill?]

I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.

we do, however, euthanize them if they're not going to get better or become too much of a burden. people have that done everyday to their pets.
that option isnt quite on the table here. what they are doing is pretty close, though.

[Taxman]

I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.
I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.

Does this mean that you would favor a bullet to the head in this case, or a lethal injection.

I do not really think that your analogy holds much water because no one ever puts a brain damaged animal on life support or a feeding tube.

[Shane W]

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.

it is exactly like turning off a ventilator. what are you talking about?

It's like a baby Jamie. Babies don't need a ventilator, but you do have to feed them since they can't do it themselves.

[xyzzy]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see why turning off a ventilator shouldn't be considered "killing" in that context, as well.

[nihilance]

The fact remains, however, that regardless of whatever moral judgment you or anyone else attaches to the word or concept of "killing," "killing" quite literally does not mean "murdering." For example, Robert Blake "murdered" his wife, and Matthew Broderick "killed" a man in an accident back in the late 1980s. Lee Harvey Oswald "murdered" John F. Kennedy, and my friend Tim "killed" a guy who ran out in front of his car.


Not to derail the thread but I found it interesting that you chose Robert Blake and Lee Harvey Oswald as your murderers when one was aquitted and the other is largely thought to be a patsy.

[Bill?]

It's like a baby Jamie. Babies don't need a ventilator, but you do have to feed them since they can't do it themselves.


That’s not a fair analogy at all. She's not like a baby. For one, Babies actually can feed themselves. They can suck on a bottle or a breast and swallow on their own. Baby’s brains develop and improve. They have personalities. They can think and have cognitive responses.

[Kensington]

I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.
I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.
Does this mean that you would favor a bullet to the head in this case, or a lethal injection.
It would certainly be more humane and, I think, honest. But that's a whole other ball of wax...
I do not really think that your analogy holds much water because no one ever puts a brain damaged animal on life support or a feeding tube.
You must not know many passionate pet owners, huh? :wink: There are people who would put their pets on life support before their "loved" ones...

I do think it's telling, however, that for all the talk coming from some corners about how humane Terri Schiavo's starvation/dehydration death will be, if this method were being used to kill animals, people would be up in arms...

[RunawayMichael]

I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.
I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.


Dogs, as loveable as they are, are not people. Comparing them to people, drawing parallels of any kind is a really good way to skew a case like this.

[Shane W]

If this is murder, then tell me, what is it when someone puts down their beloved, cancer ridden elderly dog? Is that animal abuse? Cruelty?
Can you show me a link where anyone has called the killing of Terri Schiavo "murder?" I don't think that's happened. They aren't the same thing, you know...

Several people in news interviews have called it murder and even the accusation "You're KILLING HER!"... that's not really far from 'murder'. The intent is there, plain for all to see.

You know exactly what I am talking about.

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't see why turning off a ventilator shouldn't be considered "killing" in that context, as well.

Well, normal people don't need a ventilator to live, but they do need food. Turning off the ventilator is allowing someone to die. Starving them is not aloowing them to die, but with-holding a life neccessity in any circaumstance untill they die.

[Fourthman]

The fact remains, however, that regardless of whatever moral judgment you or anyone else attaches to the word or concept of "killing," "killing" quite literally does not mean "murdering." For example, Robert Blake "murdered" his wife, and Matthew Broderick "killed" a man in an accident back in the late 1980s. Lee Harvey Oswald "murdered" John F. Kennedy, and my friend Tim "killed" a guy who ran out in front of his car.


Not to derail the thread but I found it interesting that you chose Robert Blake and Lee Harvey Oswald as your murderers when one was aquitted and the other is largely thought to be a patsy.

And neither has been found guilty.

[xyzzy]

I think using the argument of a cancer ridden dog is a little cheap. Of course we put dogs to sleep when they are sick, but we also kill cows so we can eat burgers. How we treat animals is kind of irrelevant.
I think it's relevant in this regard: we don't starve or dehydrate dogs to sleep when they're wounded.
Does this mean that you would favor a bullet to the head in this case, or a lethal injection.
It would certainly be more humane and, I think, honest. But that's a whole other ball of wax...
I do not really think that your analogy holds much water because no one ever puts a brain damaged animal on life support or a feeding tube.
You must not know many passionate pet owners, huh? :wink: There are people who would put their pets on life support before their "loved" ones...

I do think it's telling, however, that for all the talk coming from some corners about how humane Terri Schiavo's starvation/dehydration death will be, if this method were being used to kill animals, people would be up in arms...

Only because there are more humane options. Here, there is no other legal recourse.

[Kensington]

The fact remains, however, that regardless of whatever moral judgment you or anyone else attaches to the word or concept of "killing," "killing" quite literally does not mean "murdering." For example, Robert Blake "murdered" his wife, and Matthew Broderick "killed" a man in an accident back in the late 1980s. Lee Harvey Oswald "murdered" John F. Kennedy, and my friend Tim "killed" a guy who ran out in front of his car.


Not to derail the thread but I found it interesting that you chose Robert Blake and Lee Harvey Oswald as your murderers when one was aquitted and the other is largely thought to be a patsy.
Yeah, but I know better. :twisted:
And neither has been found guilty.
Bah! Neither have they been found innocent! In any case, substitute OJ Simpson for Robert Blake if you really need to.

[DaveCummings]

I think this thread needs it's feeding tube removed.

~Dave

[Blake Sims]

I think this thread needs it's feeding tube removed.

~Dave :lol:

[sonnylarue]

I do think it's telling, however, that for all the talk coming from some corners about how humane Terri Schiavo's starvation/dehydration death will be, if this method were being used to kill animals, people would be up in arms...


and I think it's telling that you argue the method rather than the legal right this legal gurdian has to end his wife's nonexistence.

these cases happen all the time, and it's only politics that is making this one unique, and keeping it from it's ultimate resolution.

the democrats who stayed away fromt he weekend vote are the only ones who respect therights of citizens being usurped by this ignorant gov't intervention.

[Kensington]

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.
I understand what you are saying, but I don't see why turning off a ventilator shouldn't be considered "killing" in that context, as well.
Ah, maybe it wasn't clear enough. I do think that turning off a ventilator probably qualifies as "killing." However, I'm more sympathetic to the description of someone having their life support removed as "letting them go." I chafe, however, at such a euphemism in the case of Terri Schiavo since starvation/dehydration is a far longer, and seems a much more severe -- arguably even torturous, way to die.

[xyzzy]

Killing, however, is still objectively what has to take place in order for Terri Schiavo to die. It's not a matter of "letting her die." This isn't like turning off a ventilator.
I understand what you are saying, but I don't see why turning off a ventilator shouldn't be considered "killing" in that context, as well.
Ah, maybe it wasn't clear enough. I do think that turning off a ventilator probably qualifies as "killing." However, I'm more sympathetic to the description of someone having their life support removed as "letting them go." I chafe, however, at such a euphemism in the case of Terri Schiavo since starvation/dehydration is a far longer, and seems a much more severe -- arguably even torturous, way to die.

OK. I'm all for making the terminology as harsh as possible. After all, we shouldn't be fooling ourselves about what is happening here. With that said, I think they should kill Terri Schaivo by starving her to death because it is the best option available at this time to satisfy her wishes.

[Kensington]

OK. I'm all for making the terminology as harsh as possible. After all, we shouldn't be fooling ourselves about what is happening here. With that said, I think they should kill Terri Schaivo by starving her to death because it is the best option available at this time to satisfy her wishes.
Well, I appreciate your directness.

[David Aspmo]

Well, normal people don't need a ventilator to live, but they do need food. Turning off the ventilator is allowing someone to die. Starving them is not aloowing them to die, but with-holding a life neccessity in any circaumstance untill they die.

Normal people need to breathe to live, which is what a ventilator does for people who are unable to breathe on their own. You turn off a ventilator, you are, in fact, "with-holding a life necessity in any circumstance until they die".

.
David Aspmo

[sonnylarue]

When are the Tv networks going to be a bit more genuine, and disclose the fact that...

the images they show of the woman blankly bopping her head around, are a minmun 4 years old?

Could it be that her condition is likely worse, with the added years of atrophy, and that CURRENT images would diminish the case to keep her alive?

[Shane W]

When are the Tv networks going to be a bit more genuine, and disclose the fact that...

the images they show of the woman blankly bopping her head around, are a minmun 4 years old?

Could it be that her condition is likely worse, with the added years of atrophy, and that CURRENT images would diminish the case to keep her alive?

Well, that could actually work to the disadvantage. If they can say without the medical help she needed, she has dropped to this. That knife could cut both ways.

[sonnylarue]

When are the Tv networks going to be a bit more genuine, and disclose the fact that...

the images they show of the woman blankly bopping her head around, are a minmun 4 years old?

Could it be that her condition is likely worse, with the added years of atrophy, and that CURRENT images would diminish the case to keep her alive?

Well, that could actually work to the disadvantage. If they can say without the medical help she needed, she has dropped to this. That knife could cut both ways.

Ok, so now the doctors are at fault for her present condition too?

They didn't try to help her duirng these 15 years?

Please.

[Bill?]

When are the Tv networks going to be a bit more genuine, and disclose the fact that...

the images they show of the woman blankly bopping her head around, are a minmun 4 years old?

Could it be that her condition is likely worse, with the added years of atrophy, and that CURRENT images would diminish the case to keep her alive?

i would think her condition is most likely worse. but i wouldnt know how worse.
the video is really sick. we only see about two seconds of over four and half hours of tape (and family had apparently been barred from taking video like that, but had snuck in a camera anyways. but thats really besides the point). so for every little bit that looks like she's reacting something on that tape, they've cut out hours were it would look like shes reacting to nothing at all. the real ultimate humiliation is when they show them lifting up her robe to focus on the hole for her feeding tube in her belly.

[Shane W]

When are the Tv networks going to be a bit more genuine, and disclose the fact that...

the images they show of the woman blankly bopping her head around, are a minmun 4 years old?

Could it be that her condition is likely worse, with the added years of atrophy, and that CURRENT images would diminish the case to keep her alive?

Well, that could actually work to the disadvantage. If they can say without the medical help she needed, she has dropped to this. That knife could cut both ways.

Ok, so now the doctors are at fault for her present condition too?

They didn't try to help her duirng these 15 years?

Please.

Not since he has been refusing therapy.. I'm not blaming the doctors.

[Bill?]

Ok, so now the doctors are at fault for her present condition too?

They didn't try to help her duirng these 15 years?

Please.

she hasnt been in rehabilitation for a long time, actually. it was felt at the time it wasnt working. at one point her husband took her to some hospital in california for an expermental type rehabilitation, but i think after even that didnt work they stopped and she was moved into hospice care.

[sonnylarue]

she hasnt been in rehabilitation for a long time, actually. it was felt at the time it wasnt working. at one point her husband took her to some hospital in california for an expermental type rehabilitation, but i think after even that didnt work they stopped and she was moved into hospice care.


gee to hear the other side, it sounded like he gave up really fast :roll:

of course as all the doctors here who have been posting know , people snap out of these brain dead situations all the time

that husband is a real jerk for giving up after 8 years.