Your take, rightwinger, is just as subjective

Yes, but I, unlike everyone else here, acknowledge that. I'm not saying my opinion is right or wrong. It's just my opinion.
Nothing any of us says here will affect what actually goes on by one jot or tittle, anyway.
As to her religious views, I know that she was Catholic, but it's easy to say that "no, wouldn't want to be let go; I'd want to live" when you're in your normal mind and everything is great.
When you're laying there, though, not really knowing anyone or anything, that might make things somewhat different. the question is, "When does life end?" Does it end when the brain dies or when the heart stops....or does it "end" when you're no longer able, physically or mentally, to do the things you loved before? That's where I'm coming from.
She's alive, yes...she breathes, she smiles...but where is she? Where is Terri Schiavo? Where is the person who enjoyed, perhaps, brussels sprouts and painting or baseball, soap operas or country music; whatever her likes and dislikes happened to be?
Does she really recognize people, or is it just the hopeful wishes of those who love her?

"Does she really recognize people, or is it just the hopeful wishes of those who love her?"

That is something no one can really know, and that is why we as a society can't make "Put them out of their misery" as the default.

You say you know she was a Catholic, but you can't see how she might have a moral problem with taking her own life? That's the gist of her husbands arguement, that she wanted to be "cut off" if she found herself in this state. Who is to say that she might not find herself in the state you describe, and have her faith reaffirmed? Why would you assume she wold reject it?

No, outside of a legal document witnessed by an objective party, there's no way someone can assume someone's religious feelings. We hold the right to make such decisions sacred in America.

I was just watching Nightline....the doctor they're interviewing states that she is in a persistent vegetative state...the sounds she makes that appear to be selective are random and not conscious. Portions of her brain have dissolved to liquid. Let her go.

Who is to say that she might not find herself in the state you describe, and have her faith reaffirmed?

Maybe I'm just not getting you; how is your faith to be "reaffirmed" when you don't even know who you are, much less anything else?

When a deer is hit by a car and survives, and is left lying on the roadside in pain, we think nothing of shooting the deer to put it out of its misery. We regularly take our pets to the vet when they get so that they can, through age or disease, no longer function normally.
Why is it so much easier to show animals the same mercy we withhold from other humans?

"Maybe I'm just not getting you; how is your faith to be "reaffirmed" when you don't even know who you are, much less anything else?"

Huh? Weren;t you the one that said:

"When you're laying there, though, not really knowing anyone or anything, that might make things somewhat different."

I was just following your supposition. If she is a "vegetable", and no one can really say for sure she is, then she isn't demeaned or degraded.

You seem to be taking issue with people for using their subjective reason and combating it with your own feelings on your own fate. You don't know her wishes about this fate any more than anyone else. If her husband was privy, he took no thought to make it legal until years after the event. Should we make yours and his feelings the default?

I was just watching Nightline....the doctor they're interviewing states that she is in a persistent vegetative state...the sounds she makes that appear to be selective are random and not conscious. Portions of her brain have dissolved to liquid. Let her go.

From my post up above.

You know what doc? We've been on the same side of many an argument, and it pains me to disagree with you on this. You're not there. You've never met the woman...If it wasn't for the big debate over her, you'd never have known about her anyway. Everything you do know is second and third-hand coming from extreme elements on one side or the other. I've gone to some of the links and read the info. I wouldn't want to live like that, and I wouldn't want to burden those that I loved, no matter how they felt, with seeing me like that, on top of having to feed me and bathe me like I was 37-year old baby. No thanks. The woman known as Terri Schiavo is gone....in her place is an adult toddler who will require intensive, hands-on attention for the rest of her existence. Would she have wanted that, do you think?

As the devout Roman catholic that she is, the answer would most certainly be YES! I have talked to a priest about this and he has assured me the church would see these circumstances as comitting suicide which is a "major" sin. And a BIG no-no as far as the catholic religon is concerned.

Updating the story: (clip comes from IWon and noted sources, headline is linked)


Judge Won't Order Schiavo Tube Reinsertion


Mar 22, 7:22 AM (ET)

By VICKIE CHACHERE

---

I have talked to a priest about this and he has assured me the church would see these circumstances as comitting suicide which is a "major" sin. And a BIG no-no as far as the catholic religon is concerned.

Yes, but this is also the same church that vehemently opposes divorce for any reason, even such things as horrific spousal abuse and serial infidelity, for example (I suppose both of which even apply to this case, in fact). The Catholic church isn't too much into common sense as pertaining personal matters, if you ask me.

Yes, but this is also the same church that vehemently opposes divorce for any reason, even such things as horrific spousal abuse and serial infidelity, for example (I suppose both of which even apply to this case, in fact). The Catholic church isn't too much into common sense as pertaining personal matters, if you ask me.

That may be. But you can be forgiven for a divorce, but you will NEVER be forgiven for a suicide

But...would YOU want to "live" like that (for that matter, would any of you)?

Frankly, I feel as long as I'm still alive, there's a reason for it. I don't want to be hooked up to a machine, and have told my wife and others this as well as had it written out. But I would not want to be starved to death, no.

In post #10, I wrote:

Third, the persistence of 15 years in a coma speaks for itself. The emotional toll, not to mention the medical bills, must be unbearable.

In post #58, Gideon wrote:

Umm, NOT a coma. This isn't "splitting hairs", it's a VERY IMPORTANT medical distinction.

No problem. I'll restate: Third, the persistence of 15 years in a vegetative state speaks for itself. The emotional toll, not to mention the medical bills, must be unbearable.

Otherwise, I stand by every word in post #10.

Flip...

Reply #31 By: Citizen Moderateman - 3/19/2005 4:13:35 PM there is no excuse to starve someone to death. period.

Flop...

Reply #54 By: Citizen Moderateman - 3/20/2005 11:30:26 PM STARVE A LIBERAL FOR A BETTER AMERICA.COM

Moder-rant man strikes again...

Companion article: Poll indicates little support for Congress' intervention

But you can be forgiven for a divorce, but you will NEVER be forgiven for a suicide

We had a discussion about this in class one Sunday, and the pastor said he believes that all sins were covered by the Cross, even suicide.
Besides, he said, anyone who would take their own life would have to be a pretty sick person, mentally, spiritually and emotionally. Would a loving God condemn the mentally incompetant to eternal damnation? That's the question here. Especially if she was simply "let go" by someone else.

I cannot believe this debate is still going on - so I'll finally add my two cents. I am pro-life and firmly against the idea of euthanasia. Let's look at the facts:

Terry Schiavo is under the guardianship of Mr. Schiavo. Regardless of what one thinks of Mr. Schiavo, he had the most intimate relationship with Terry. If any one person knew or could deduce what Terry would have wanted, this is the person. Terry's parents say Terry would have wished to be kept alive while in this state, but aren't they really looking out for their interests not what Terry may have wished?

"Terry", as the world knew her before the heart attack that brought on her PVS, is effectively deceased. Her brain can no long sustain higher cognitive functionality that would qualify her as a person; she is not aware of herself. This loss of consciousness where someone can no longer tell if they are even alive is commonly referred to as "death".

Terry's parents love her. They have her body with all it's involuntary and reflexive behaviour to remember her by. They want to keep that alive. They have even mentioned that they will go to such lengths as quadruple amputation when it comes time for that inevitable operation to occur to keep her body warm and her breath flowing. Unfortunately, they cannot be selfish. They must learn to let go, and they must live with the reality that though they have Terry's body, they no longer have Terry.

Some have tried to use this instance to pander to what they believe to be their constituent's interests. While doing so, they have managed an improper and sloppy attempt at skirting the court's ruling. Terri's law is more poor legislature designed by opportunist politicians. The Florida Supreme Court ruled unaminously that the legislative and executive branches were unconstitutionally interfering with the judicial branch's duty - to interpret the law. This is true but the court noted something else even more important - Terri's Law was a prime example of what is known as "Retroactive Legislation".

Retroactive legislation happens when a law changes the nature of things that have happened before the law was enacted. In most countries retroactive legislation is deemed unconstitutional.

Surprise, we're one of those countries.

In our legal system, we've been just and correct to Mrs. Schiavo. Our court system was deliberate, rational, and exhausted every avenue to bring proper, tailor fit justice to this unusual case. Some would rather wrapping Americans such as Mrs. Schiavo in a broad social and spiritual blanket where private family matters are subject to mob rule, but this time, the blanket was simply too tattered.

oh yeah...

On March 11, media tycoon Robert Herring (who believes that embryonic stem cell research could cause Schiavo's condition to be curable in the future) offered $1 million to Michael Schiavo if he agreed to waive his guardianship to his wife's parents. He rejected the offer, as he had rejected other monetary offers, including one of $10 million. The offer expired on March 14, 2005, four days before her feeding tube was removed. Schiavo's attorney, George J. Felos, said his client found the offer "offensive".

It's easy to see that Mr. Schiavo has made a principled decision. One that he stands by to the tune of $10 million dollars.

Sources:
------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Schiavo

"No problem. I'll restate: Third, the persistence of 15 years in a vegetative state speaks for itself. The emotional toll, not to mention the medical bills, must be unbearable."

On who? The only people dealing with it want to keep her alive. The person who wants to starve her to death is the one that has "moved on"...

Deference: again, this isn't a polygamist nation. When this guy "moved on" so should his guardianship status. Had he the information he claims to have had, he should have urged her to make it legal. As it stands the whole thing is a sham.

On who? The only people dealing with it want to keep her alive. The person who wants to starve her to death is the one that has "moved on"...

Wrong. Mr Schiavo is still her husband & obviously still very involved.

Not like it's any of our business.

We had a discussion about this in class one Sunday, and the pastor said he believes that all sins were covered by the Cross, even suicide. Besides, he said, anyone who would take their own life would have to be a pretty sick person, mentally, spiritually and emotionally. Would a loving God condemn the mentally incompetant to eternal damnation? That's the question here. Especially if she was simply "let go" by someone else.

Are you a catholic? Judging by what you wrote I'd say no. Wether you are or not.....you should go look at catholic doctrine concerning this.

On who? The only people dealing with it want to keep her alive. The person who wants to starve her to death is the one that has "moved on"... Wrong. Mr Schiavo is still her husband & obviously still very involved.

The *only* reason this prick is even remotely involved is because he wants her dead. And BTW if he's so obviously involved why does he have a live-in female companion and 2 children by her?

Ah, obviously very involved. How so? I mean, besides the endless fight to have her starved to death.

Come now re-gressive, if it is so obvious, I'd like a rundown of Mr Schiavo's participation in the day-to-day care of his (ex)wife. Unless of course your assumption that he is involved is just as subjective as you are accusing our opinions to be...

Are you a catholic? Judging by what you wrote I'd say no. Wether you are or not.....you should go look at catholic doctrine concerning this.

No, I'm not, but my father was raised in the Church (but died a Presbyterian) and my aunt is still very much a practicing Roman Catholic.
So, I am familiar with church doctrine; I just don't agree with a lot of it.
That's why a lot of practicing Catholics leave the church, too, like my dad.

Are you a catholic? Judging by what you wrote I'd say no. Wether you are or not.....you should go look at catholic doctrine concerning this. No, I'm not, but my father was raised in the Church (but died a Presbyterian) and my aunt is still very much a practicing Roman Catholic. So, I am familiar with church doctrine; I just don't agree with a lot of it. That's why a lot of practicing Catholics leave the church, too, like my dad

If you are familiar with doctrine then you know what they're doing to her is considered a major sin. As far as anyone has been able to find out, she's still catholic. So she most certainly would NOT have said pull the plug.

So she most certainly would NOT have said pull the plug.

But this is so easy to say when you're the one saying it. She's the one lying there in a continual fog that never lifts, and will never lift. She'll never be able to reason normally again, never again enjoy the things she liked to do, whatever they may have been. She'll just...."be".
I just find it so difficult to believe that any intelligent person in their right mind would honestly say "If I'm ever left a mental vegetable, don't let me die...just let me go on like that." I would NOT want to be left like that. Why would I? Why would anyone?
Can you really, truthfully say, forgetting your Catholic background for a minute, that you WOULD want to be left like that?

But this is so easy to say when you're the one saying it. She's the one lying there in a continual fog that never lifts, and will never lift. She'll never be able to reason normally again, never again enjoy the things she liked to do, whatever they may have been. She'll just...."be". I just find it so difficult to believe that any intelligent person in their right mind would honestly say "If I'm ever left a mental vegetable, don't let me die...just let me go on like that." I would NOT want to be left like that. Why would I? Why would anyone? Can you really, truthfully say, forgetting your Catholic background for a minute, that you WOULD want to be left like that?

You CAN'T forget her catholic backround. It's part of who she is. If she *truly* believes then pulling the plug would consign her to hell forever according to church doctrine. A non-catholic has that choice, a true catholic does not! And as far as being in a continual fog? I think not! Go look at some of the videos of her and then try again to convince me of this supposed fog.