Main > Everything Else
Schiavo rumblings
daywane:
I must go with the husband.
My wife and family know I do not ever want to go on like that.
but Starve the girl?
give her a shot and be done with it.
show some mercy. I have put animals to sleep for less pain
Its the year 2005 we can do better for people than yank the tube.
OD the girl and move on.
fredster:
--- Quote ---Why does this need to be dragged out any further?
--- End quote ---
Because her mother and father want her to live, that's why.
I don't agree with dragging this on either. I never said I did. But I understand why.
People are upset, the media has painted the picture of the devil himself on this man.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: mr.Curmudgeon on March 20, 2005, 05:05:56 pm ---
How short-sighted do you have to be to conclude that this sort of thing couldn't *ever* happen to fredster?
--- End quote ---
How myopic do you have to be to conclude from the words I posted that I EVER said this sort of thing couldn't happen to him?
--- Quote ---
Simply, because your powers of insight allow you to deem him a "good person", based on forum postings on the internet?
--- End quote ---
No, it comes from more than that. It comes from personally speaking to him, from seeing how he deals with what he's going through presently, from seeing how he's dealt with his situation thus far, and from seeing people who ARE in his exact same situation speak of him. It isn't as simplistic as you'd like to paint it, for whatever reason you wish to question my opinion of fredster. Frankly, you can't even begin to understand why I respect him as I do, and no amount of explaining is necessary to attempt to overcome your jaded view.
--- Quote ---
This is about the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT trampling on STATE GOVERNMENT and using a families emotional turmoil as plausible deniability. (We'll, they asked us to!!)
Time and again, it seems those on the right of the policital spectrum are incapable of defending against a wrong-headed position unless it absolutely happens to them.
--- End quote ---
You started speaking of my words to fredster. Is this an attempt to lump them in with this case, when the two situations are, in fact, different and would have differing legal opnions as they stand right now, or simply a way to impugn the both of us because of some percieved wrong we've committed? You're speaking of points that have nothing to do with my words to fredster.
cdbrown:
I saw this story on TV this morning while getting ready for work and thought let her pass away. Then they had an interview with a Dr or something like that and he went through the various reasons as to why she is still receiving sustainance through a tube. He then went on to say there is a $1M trust fund from a malpractice payout which the husband would get once she dies and that the husband didn't make any appeals for the tube to be removed prior to the trust fund being formed.
I wouldn't want to be a vegetable for years on end kept alive by a machine unless there is a good chance of being treated and actually have quality of life. From the small bits I've seen it does seem this guy is chasing the money while her parents don't want to give up the hope that things could change for her.
shmokes:
The lady needs to die. Starvation/thirstation is retarded, no doubt. Any orderly with a heart (who could get away with it) would put a pillow over her face. Obviously something even more humane, like a shot, would be preferrable.
Christ, we're going to put Scott Peterson to death. And for what? To protect society from him? No, of course not. As retaliation for him seeming cold and heartless in the courtroom.
This is a lady who's been laying in bed for fifteen years. If she has any cognitive function left her only thought for the last 14 and 1/2 has been, "Let me die you dumb ---daisies---. Can't you see I can't do it myself? What the *%$! is wrong with you people?"
If starvation is the only legal way to go (God Bless you Dr. Kavorkian), so be it. Three days of misery is a pinprick compared with the last 15 years of her life, not to mention however long she still has in her if the tubes remain.
So what if the guy is after the money? Because he's a discusting person this poor woman should have to endure even more years of torture? If the guy put off petitioning that the tubes be removed until the $1M trust fund got set up, shame on him. She should have been allowed to die, or put to death, if you prefer, years ago. Just because she wasn't doesn't mean that she shouldn't be now, just to deprive this guy of the cash.
I thought it was summed up well earlier in the thread when someone referred to keeping this woman alive for the last 15 years as "ghoulish". God, it sends shivers up my spine.