Rest in Peace Terri

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001

Originally posted by: meltdown75

Originally posted by: Deeko
I hate all of you dumbfvcks that bitch about anything remotely news or politics related being posted here. Seriously, just shut up.

do you like hamburgers? i do.

Hamburgers = :thumbsup:

mmmm cheeseburgers from http://www.louislunch.com/ at least once a week for me

How about where cheeseburgers were invented?

louis was established in 1896......nice try.

Right. But they were just making hamburgers back then.

I dont think it can be proved that a piece of cheese was never placed on any of the burgers they made until after 1934. I will ask them this weekend.

 

[conjur]

Cool...PM me with their response. I'm truly interested.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: BroeBo
Wow can we not hear anything else about it now? She is finally where she wanted to be a long time ago.

If only.

The Fund-A-Mentals will be in an uproar now and will demand Bush do something to prevent this from happening again (read, push for the confirmation of more conservative judges to the Federal courts).

It's far from over.

See what I mean? It's far from over:

Conference Demands: No More Terri Schiavos
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=45109

Rick Scarborough, acting chairman of the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration, expressed sadness at the death of Terri Schiavo and offered his heartfelt condolences to the Schindler family.

"Terri Schiavo's suffering is over, God rest her soul," Scarborough commented. "Now our mission is to ensure that there will be no more Terri Schiavos -- that no other disabled person is subjected to her cruel fate."

"The Schiavo case demonstrates the mortal danger of giving judges the unbridled power of life and death," Scarborough charged.

In just one week, the Council's first conference -- Confronting The Judicial War On Faith -- will convene at the Washington Marriott in Washington, D.C. Confronting The Judicial War On Faith will address the rising tide of judicial despotism, of which the Schiavo case is the latest and most poignant example.

Keynote speakers will include House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who was instrumental in moving the Schiavo legislation through Congress, and David C. Gibbs, Esq. of the Christian Law Association, who represented Terri's parents in their valiant efforts to save her life.

Other speakers at the Confronting The Judicial War On Faith conference (April 7-8) include: Sen. Sam Brownback, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, Alan Keyes, former Vatican Ambassador Ray Flynn, Rep. Steve Chabot, Rep. Todd Akin, Phyllis Schlafly and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

The conference also will consider Ten Commandments displays and the right of Americans to publicly acknowledge God, judicial nominations, the judicial assault on marriage and remedies to judicial tyranny.

Scarborough stressed: "This will be an action-oriented conference. Our purpose is to draw up a plan of action to oppose the liberal judges who have abrogated our most precious human rights -- including Terri Schiavo's right to life. Out of it will come a coalition of family groups, ministries and churches dedicated to restoring constitutional rights and liberty."

For more information on the Confronting The Judicial War On Faith Conference -- including a complete list of speakers, program and information on registration -- go to http://www.stopactivistjudges.org or call 866-522-5582.

These fvcking morons will NEVER cease. They just don't care that Terri's own wishes were to not be kept alive artificially.

 

[Mallow]

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
I'm going to repeat what I posted in the official Shiavo thread in P & N:

All esle aside. This Michel Shiavo guy is a class A P...R...I...C...K!

What kind of horses ASS wouldn't even allow the parents of their dying daughter be by her side in her final hours. Forget feeding tubes and all of the other BS.

That is just plain un-human and IMO this action alone proves that this man is lower than whale sh!t, and whale sh!t, my friends, is at the bottom of the ocean.

Umm... on CNN it said her parents were with her up until 10 mins before she died, GJ on your facts.

 

[MidasKnight]

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: Nightfall

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer


I'm not really following your logic here. It seems like a diversionary tactic to avoid addressing the actuall content of my post. If you want to label me for calling Shiavo's actions out as being a horses a$$ and that's your sole premis for attacking me then go ahead! But calling a spaid a spaid does not hardly put me in contradiction with myself. And I'm not attempting to be holier than thou, if my harsh criticism of this mans selfish acitons offends you than for that I apologize, but I think you've clearly missed my point if you're hanging your hat solely on derogatory comments.

^--- fundamentalist christians like jollyroger is why America can't have nice things.

Boy that's intelligent :roll:. Why don't you paint with a little wider brush next time, I think you missed a spot. And BTW, I'm agnostic. Go home.

My point was clear enough, but let me clarify it a bit more.

You were using insults in your arguement (towards the other ATOT member; to some extent toward Shiavo).... which was odd given that your arguement alluded to the idea that 'common decency' should be upheld even at times of emotional duress. But I suppose it all depends on how you define what's decent and what's not.

Diversionary tactic? No, it was a suggestion that you try practicing what you preach. This does address your post's content. How can you expect Shiavo to act maturely after a 10 years of legal and emotional warfare, when you allow yourself to act childishly after 15 minutes of internet? Or perhaps, you disagree that you were acting childishly?

My point was simply that after all the bad blood, it doesn't suprise me how he reacted. Heck, I am sure that there are some people in this forum who have seen a family member die slowly. Even a few of us have had a family friend or member in a coma for a year and maybe they had to pull the plug. Look at everything Micheal has had to deal with. Look at the emotional stress of seeing his wife unable to care for herself and the fact she is a vegetable. Look at all the money he spent and time to try to get her better. Then her parents step in and the legal battle starts. Look at the slander that her parents unleashed on him claiming he was a wife beater and other personal attacks, all of which are unproven and/or downright untrue. After 15 years of this ordeal, wouldn't you feel just a little upset too?

I am not saying that I agree with what Micheal did. I just said I would be pissed too in his situation. To say you wouldn't deny rights to have her parents in the room at the time of death isn't accurate. Now be honest with yourself, you have no idea how you would react in a situation like this. I would be willing to bet that none of us have been in this situation for that long a period of time.

How would I react? Put me in that spot and I will be able to tell you 15 years later. A lot can change in that time. Even your "common decency".

Speaking of decency, I would agree with HomeBrewerDude in that while you may have common decency in mind when it comes to Terri, you really have a little to learn when it comes to respecting other people.

EDIT: This was primarially sent to the attention of JoLLyRoGer but I added some clarifaction to my point to everyone who has been following this.

First of all you come out and say point blank:

Originally posted by: Nightfall

Sorry, in his position, I would be pretty pissed off too and would probably deny them access at the last moments of her life.

Indicating that you both support and condone his decision.
And then you cleverly recant youself saying:

Originally posted by: Nightfall

I am not saying that I agree with what Micheal did.

So which is it because I'm confused?

Now, granted you make a good point about not knowing how you or I or anyone else would react after 15 years of legal turmoil. You also assume that Michael did NOT beat his wife (and I don't know if he did or didn't) and that he WAS there for her the past 15 years. I'll concede that he tried for about 4 years to get her back and that is well documented and commendable. However, after winning the settlement of $750,000 or whatever it was, then why did he refuse to allow her any further rehibiltative therapy to include basic range of motion exercises (which is also well documented)? From what I understand this guy had moved on and started a new family with his live-in-girlfriend. That doesn't sound like mental anguish to me. Then he turns around and spends that money on...what? Does anybody really konw? It couldn't have been Terri if he was denying her any treatment after shoving her away in some long term care facility where he could just forget about her. If he really wanted out then he could have easily turned over custody to the parents. They even offered to let him keep the money. He could have cashed out and moved on. Was it bacause he had her best interest at heart? If that's the case then what does it say about him starting this new family and denying her any treatment whatsoever? You can argue that Terri mentioned that she wished to die, and Michael has been on this crusade to protect her interestes, but that is nothing more than hearsae regardless of what the courts believe (because we know they never get it wrong) it is undocumented. What's his real interest in Terri Shiavo? An insurance settlement perhaps? I don't know but its a thought.

Regardless of all of this none of it mitigates his actions to deny her parents the right to be with her as she passed away.

Now if you agree with his actions like your OP indicates you do then I believe you are lacking a great deal of compassion which is truly sad. If you dont' agree with his actions like you later stated then I am admittedly wrong in my assessment of your values. Here is your chance to say what you mean and mean what you say.


Now for you Phokus:

You choose to dismiss me as acting childish and in more words than one are accusing me of being hypocritical under the guise that you have elected the moral high ground while at the same time throwing lables around to bolster your position. Here is a good example of childish:

Originally posted by: Phokus

^--- crazy fundamentalist christians like jollyroger are the reason why America can't have nice things.

Now, speaking of hypocracy, who is the pot and who is the kettle here hmm?

Furthermore, I invite to you point out exactly where I directly used slanderous and/or derogatory terms to describe Mr. Nighfall. If you're referring to my 2nd post then I suggest you re-read it. My comments were aimed specifically at Michael Shiavo. If Nightfall agrees with Shiavo's actions then I think he should evaluate what he is saying about himself. However, no where will you find me naming Nightfall as either a horses a$$ or a prick. On the other hand, again.... you missed the point. Cheers!:wine:

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: Mallow

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
I'm going to repeat what I posted in the official Shiavo thread in P & N:

All esle aside. This Michel Shiavo guy is a class A P...R...I...C...K!

What kind of horses ASS wouldn't even allow the parents of their dying daughter be by her side in her final hours. Forget feeding tubes and all of the other BS.

That is just plain un-human and IMO this action alone proves that this man is lower than whale sh!t, and whale sh!t, my friends, is at the bottom of the ocean.

Umm... on CNN it said her parents were with her up until 10 mins before she died, GJ on your facts.

Those were the headlines when this thing started. Where were you?

FYI here is what the headline on Fox was:
Terri Schiavo Dies at 41
Parents denied access to daughter's bedside in last hours.

They're quickly recanting themselves now and changing that to moments. If that's the case then I've got to retrack my whole argument but it doesn't invalidate the moral fabric of what I've said prior to this latest update. So that's what I get for believing the Associated Press.:roll:

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Nik
I hope that douche bag murderer of a husband burns in hell :|

You have got to be f*cking kidding me. :roll:

you expected any less?

Nik is usually only completely unreasonable when the discussion is regarding pot.

you haven't read the WIRED thread have you?

Or anything regarding the court case, either, apparently. He's been whining for years "is the bitch dead yet?" which the hospice nurse of 2 or 3 years testified. Each time he came in, he'd ask that nurse "is the bitch dead yet?" :Q He was behind her feeding tube being removed. He refused to divorce her so that her parents would have authority over her. They wanted to take care of her and they were willing to pay for it. He boasted for 8 years that he'd take care of her and asked for money to do it. When he got the millions, he suddenly remembered that she told him once that she never wanted to be kept alive and somehow convinced folks 7 years later that it doesn't matter what was on paper, her supposedly telling him this years ago that he *suddenly* remembered *after* getting his money supercedes (sp?) everything. He's wanted her dead for years. He could have divorced her, but instead he shacked up with some other woman and had two kids with her. Why didn't he divorce her and let her parents take care of her? Why control her life and FORCE her death by removing her feeding tube AGAIN (he's tried to kill her by removing her feeding tube THREE TIMES in the past years)? There were doctors involved who said she WASN'T in a PVS.

Michael is a sick, sick man.

 

[Miramonti]

Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

 

[surreal1221]

Originally posted by: pclstyle
about time

I agree. . .

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Nik
Or anything regarding the court case, either, apparently. He's been whining for years "is the bitch dead yet?" which the hospice nurse of 2 or 3 years testified. Each time he came in, he'd ask that nurse "is the bitch dead yet?" :Q He was behind her feeding tube being removed. He refused to divorce her so that her parents would have authority over her. They wanted to take care of her and they were willing to pay for it. He boasted for 8 years that he'd take care of her and asked for money to do it. When he got the millions, he suddenly remembered that she told him once that she never wanted to be kept alive and somehow convinced folks 7 years later that it doesn't matter what was on paper, her supposedly telling him this years ago that he *suddenly* remembered *after* getting his money supercedes (sp?) everything. He's wanted her dead for years. He could have divorced her, but instead he shacked up with some other woman and had two kids with her. Why didn't he divorce her and let her parents take care of her? Why control her life and FORCE her death by removing her feeding tube AGAIN (he's tried to kill her by removing her feeding tube THREE TIMES in the past years)? There were doctors involved who said she WASN'T in a PVS.

Michael is a sick, sick man.

There was ONE doctor out of EIGHT and, conveniently, it was a doctor hired by the Schindlers (or their attorney). Scroll back a bit for more info from Dr. Canford's various interviews and links to Terri's CAT scans.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

And why didn't he just do that? Because he knew Terri didn't want to be kept alive artificially and he was trying to fulfull her wishes.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

Who cares, she sure didn't.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

it was proven she no longer had a cerebral cortex....there was a gaping hole where it was supposed to be...but thats no big deal right? its only responsible for the following:

The cerebral cortex receives sensory information from many different sensory organs eg: eyes, ears etc and processes the information. Areas that receive that particular information are called sensory areas. The two hemispheres receive the information from the opposite sides of the body. Parts of the cortex that receive this information are called primary sensory areas. Other areas receive impulses from the primary sensory areas and integrate the information coming in from different types of receptors. These are known as association areas and make up a great deal of the cortex in all primates including us. The cortex is comprised of the motor areas and the association areas.

There are three association areas:

in the parietal, temporal and occipital lobes. It is involved in producing our perceptions resulting from what our eyes see, ears hear and other sensory organs tell us about the position of different parts of our body
in the frontal lobe. Called prefrontal association complex and involved in planning actions and movement
in the limbic association area. Involved in emotion and memory


your right she could have spontaneiously been fine one day. :roll:

 

[40Hands]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

it was proven she no longer had a cerebral cortex....there was a gaping hole where it was supposed to be...but thats no big deal right? its only responsible for the following:

The cerebral cortex receives sensory information from many different sensory organs eg: eyes, ears etc and processes the information. Areas that receive that particular information are called sensory areas. The two hemispheres receive the information from the opposite sides of the body. Parts of the cortex that receive this information are called primary sensory areas. Other areas receive impulses from the primary sensory areas and integrate the information coming in from different types of receptors. These are known as association areas and make up a great deal of the cortex in all primates including us. The cortex is comprised of the motor areas and the association areas.

There are three association areas:

in the parietal, temporal and occipital lobes. It is involved in producing our perceptions resulting from what our eyes see, ears hear and other sensory organs tell us about the position of different parts of our body
in the frontal lobe. Called prefrontal association complex and involved in planning actions and movement
in the limbic association area. Involved in emotion and memory


your right she could have spontaneiously been fine one day. :roll:

This is about Terry responding to music and smiling when her mom says something. Not about all your scientific mombo jombo. Duh. :disgust:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BroeBo

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

it was proven she no longer had a cerebral cortex....there was a gaping hole where it was supposed to be...but thats no big deal right? its only responsible for the following:

The cerebral cortex receives sensory information from many different sensory organs eg: eyes, ears etc and processes the information. Areas that receive that particular information are called sensory areas. The two hemispheres receive the information from the opposite sides of the body. Parts of the cortex that receive this information are called primary sensory areas. Other areas receive impulses from the primary sensory areas and integrate the information coming in from different types of receptors. These are known as association areas and make up a great deal of the cortex in all primates including us. The cortex is comprised of the motor areas and the association areas.

There are three association areas:

in the parietal, temporal and occipital lobes. It is involved in producing our perceptions resulting from what our eyes see, ears hear and other sensory organs tell us about the position of different parts of our body
in the frontal lobe. Called prefrontal association complex and involved in planning actions and movement
in the limbic association area. Involved in emotion and memory


your right she could have spontaneiously been fine one day. :roll:

This is about Terry responding to music and smiling when her mom says something. Not about all your scientific mombo jombo. Duh. :disgust:

Don't some plants respond to music?

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BroeBo

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: jjsole
Her family, the media, and ev/fundies gave this brain dead person so much artificial life and personality before she died, they should have no problem again resurrecting from the dead now in a way Jesus would be proud.

It was never proven that she was brain dead. Even if she was, she didn't have a medical directive on paper. Nobody knows what she really wanted. Her parents wanted to take care of her as long as they could, with their own money. Michael refused to divorce her (even though he was dating some other chick and has two fvcking kids with her) to allow them to do so.

it was proven she no longer had a cerebral cortex....there was a gaping hole where it was supposed to be...but thats no big deal right? its only responsible for the following:

The cerebral cortex receives sensory information from many different sensory organs eg: eyes, ears etc and processes the information. Areas that receive that particular information are called sensory areas. The two hemispheres receive the information from the opposite sides of the body. Parts of the cortex that receive this information are called primary sensory areas. Other areas receive impulses from the primary sensory areas and integrate the information coming in from different types of receptors. These are known as association areas and make up a great deal of the cortex in all primates including us. The cortex is comprised of the motor areas and the association areas.

There are three association areas:

in the parietal, temporal and occipital lobes. It is involved in producing our perceptions resulting from what our eyes see, ears hear and other sensory organs tell us about the position of different parts of our body
in the frontal lobe. Called prefrontal association complex and involved in planning actions and movement
in the limbic association area. Involved in emotion and memory


your right she could have spontaneiously been fine one day. :roll:

This is about Terry responding to music and smiling when her mom says something. Not about all your scientific mombo jombo. Duh. :disgust:

Don't some plants respond to music?

and your voice. If you talk to your plant it will be healthier and grow faster.

 

[wondersteve]

RIP

 

[revnja]

Originally posted by: pclstyle
about time

 

[StageLeft]

It's about time and anybody calling her husband a murder, golly, see a physician and get that checked out.

 

[Nightfall]

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: Nightfall

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer


I'm not really following your logic here. It seems like a diversionary tactic to avoid addressing the actuall content of my post. If you want to label me for calling Shiavo's actions out as being a horses a$$ and that's your sole premis for attacking me then go ahead! But calling a spaid a spaid does not hardly put me in contradiction with myself. And I'm not attempting to be holier than thou, if my harsh criticism of this mans selfish acitons offends you than for that I apologize, but I think you've clearly missed my point if you're hanging your hat solely on derogatory comments.

^--- fundamentalist christians like jollyroger is why America can't have nice things.

Boy that's intelligent :roll:. Why don't you paint with a little wider brush next time, I think you missed a spot. And BTW, I'm agnostic. Go home.

My point was clear enough, but let me clarify it a bit more.

You were using insults in your arguement (towards the other ATOT member; to some extent toward Shiavo).... which was odd given that your arguement alluded to the idea that 'common decency' should be upheld even at times of emotional duress. But I suppose it all depends on how you define what's decent and what's not.

Diversionary tactic? No, it was a suggestion that you try practicing what you preach. This does address your post's content. How can you expect Shiavo to act maturely after a 10 years of legal and emotional warfare, when you allow yourself to act childishly after 15 minutes of internet? Or perhaps, you disagree that you were acting childishly?

My point was simply that after all the bad blood, it doesn't suprise me how he reacted. Heck, I am sure that there are some people in this forum who have seen a family member die slowly. Even a few of us have had a family friend or member in a coma for a year and maybe they had to pull the plug. Look at everything Micheal has had to deal with. Look at the emotional stress of seeing his wife unable to care for herself and the fact she is a vegetable. Look at all the money he spent and time to try to get her better. Then her parents step in and the legal battle starts. Look at the slander that her parents unleashed on him claiming he was a wife beater and other personal attacks, all of which are unproven and/or downright untrue. After 15 years of this ordeal, wouldn't you feel just a little upset too?

I am not saying that I agree with what Micheal did. I just said I would be pissed too in his situation. To say you wouldn't deny rights to have her parents in the room at the time of death isn't accurate. Now be honest with yourself, you have no idea how you would react in a situation like this. I would be willing to bet that none of us have been in this situation for that long a period of time.

How would I react? Put me in that spot and I will be able to tell you 15 years later. A lot can change in that time. Even your "common decency".

Speaking of decency, I would agree with HomeBrewerDude in that while you may have common decency in mind when it comes to Terri, you really have a little to learn when it comes to respecting other people.

EDIT: This was primarially sent to the attention of JoLLyRoGer but I added some clarifaction to my point to everyone who has been following this.

First of all you come out and say point blank:

Originally posted by: Nightfall

Sorry, in his position, I would be pretty pissed off too and would probably deny them access at the last moments of her life.

Indicating that you both support and condone his decision.
And then you cleverly recant youself saying:

Originally posted by: Nightfall

I am not saying that I agree with what Micheal did.

So which is it because I'm confused?

Now, granted you make a good point about not knowing how you or I or anyone else would react after 15 years of legal turmoil. You also assume that Michael did NOT beat his wife (and I don't know if he did or didn't) and that he WAS there for her the past 15 years. I'll concede that he tried for about 4 years to get her back and that is well documented and commendable. However, after winning the settlement of $750,000 or whatever it was, then why did he refuse to allow her any further rehibiltative therapy to include basic range of motion exercises (which is also well documented)? From what I understand this guy had moved on and started a new family with his live-in-girlfriend. That doesn't sound like mental anguish to me. Then he turns around and spends that money on...what? Does anybody really konw? It couldn't have been Terri if he was denying her any treatment after shoving her away in some long term care facility where he could just forget about her. If he really wanted out then he could have easily turned over custody to the parents. They even offered to let him keep the money. He could have cashed out and moved on. Was it bacause he had her best interest at heart? If that's the case then what does it say about him starting this new family and denying her any treatment whatsoever? You can argue that Terri mentioned that she wished to die, and Michael has been on this crusade to protect her interestes, but that is nothing more than hearsae regardless of what the courts believe (because we know they never get it wrong) it is undocumented. What's his real interest in Terri Shiavo? An insurance settlement perhaps? I don't know but its a thought.

Regardless of all of this none of it mitigates his actions to deny her parents the right to be with her as she passed away.

Now if you agree with his actions like your OP indicates you do then I believe you are lacking a great deal of compassion which is truly sad. If you dont' agree with his actions like you later stated then I am admittedly wrong in my assessment of your values. Here is your chance to say what you mean and mean what you say.

No offense, but just because I say that I would cut her parents off doesn't mean that is the right thing to do. I was just saying, off the cuff, how would I feel after everything that has happened if I was in his shoes. Just because you act out of anger or fustration doesn't make it the right thing to do. That said, based on all the negative things that happened, how would I react? I have no idea. I would go out on a limb to say that even though you say you would allow her parents in now, imagine all the anguish and problems they caused you for that long a period of time and see how you feel.

Recanting my statement? Hardly. You just took it out of context.

The wife beating accusations came from her parents, which were totally unfounded which is why I brought that up. No offense, but if I was caring for my wife while in the hospital and her parents said I beat her I would be pretty upset.

As for why he stopped treatment, I seem to remember reading that he had doctors come in to see her and they all gave him the same honest opinion. She was brain dead and a vegetable. There was no way she was getting better. Why spend money in that case? After pouring money into that for four years, I can understand if there was no way she was going to be even REMOTELY the same person that he married, why keep puting money and time into that project. The person that was Terri Schavio was dead, all he was puting his time and money into was a shell.

Let me see, after 4 years of not having a relationship and knowing his wife wasn't going to ever recover, I would probably start looking again. You trying to say you wouldn't? How much hope would you put into that relationship if there was no chance she was ever coming back? Doesn't sound like mental anguish? He was working at this for over 4 years! That is a long ass time knowing she isn't coming back.

A $750,000 settlement isn't a drop in the bucket compared to all those things you want. On NBC, Micheal said that all that money he won in the settlement paid the bills his insurance wouldn't pay for. He said he is so deep in debt right now from no only hospital bills but lawyer costs that he may never recover. Don't think he just pocketed the money and ran. He was spending money the entire time on her care. It doesn't matter who pays though.

As for his crusade to make sure his wife got what she wanted, wouldn't you work your ass off for someone you love? It seems that you along with the media have painted a picture of this guy as a "wife killer" who didn't care about his wife at all. That is what infuriates me to be honest with you. We ought to have laws in this country that prevent this crap from happening. My wife should be able to tell the doctors what they should do when it comes to pulling the plug on me if I was ever brain dead. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. I don't care if Pope himself comes down to the hospital I am at and says I should live. It is up to my wife to speak for me. Not my parents, even though they would be upset.

Now, as you said, reguardless of all this, does it mitigate him locking her parents out? Off the cuff, I may have done it based on all the crap her parents did. Based on all the lies they spread and the bitter court battle that lasted about 10 years longer than it should have. To say you wouldn't have done it and sticking with that statement further proves you haven't been in a situation like that. Put yourself in his shoes and really think about it instead of being a sideline reporter.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: NFS4
Headline News reporter: "As the nation mourns the death of Terri Schiavo"

The Nation mourns the death? Give me a flippin' break

Correction: As the Religious Fundies mourn.....

True. I really felt sad for the woman, I really did. I sympathized with her (when the story first broke a few years ago).

But it's recently that the furvor has gotten out of hand and people coming out of the woodworks trying to keep alive what is basically a vegetable. The constant media attention, the 24-7 coverage, the President and the Congress getting involved in what is essentially a husband/wife matter. Then you have the religious whackos comparing her to Jesus and carrying around 4' replicas of Christ hanging on the cross. I mean, come on.

It's then that I started getting entirely fed up with the whole thing.

Perfectly said! :thumbsup:

 

[conjur]

Good op/ed:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/11277900.htm

''Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him'' - Job 13:15

The tears surprised me. I pulled over, blinded by them.

The incident is sharp in memory because it was a turning point: the moment I finally accepted the unacceptable. My mom was going to lose her battle with breast cancer. She was going to die.

My sisters and brother had already come to terms with it. I was the one still clinging, stubbornly and defiantly, to an expectation of miracles. To do otherwise felt like a betrayal of my mother. And of my faith.

But that day back in 1988, acceptance finally forced itself on me. Cancer had made her a stick figure. It had clouded her mind with hallucination. And it had reduced her to a toddler, her hand feather light in mine as she tottered down the hall.

I left her bedside at a trot. Got in the car and drove until I couldn't see.

As you've probably guessed, I'm writing about Terri Schiavo, who died today. And I'm doing what I guess we all do when we contemplate her tragedy. I am personalizing it.

How can you not? On the one side, there is Michael Schiavo, ordering removal of the feeding tube that sustained his wife for 15 years because, he said, she would not have wanted to live in a vegetative state. On the other, there are the parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, begging in tears for their daughter to simply live, in whatever state she could. It is only natural to run such a painful conundrum though the filter of experience -- or imagination -- and try to tease out truth you can live with.

Here's mine. Acceptance is hard. Acceptance hurts like hell.

For as much time as we've spent discussing spousal rights, political opportunism and the meaning of life, I think that's the signature lesson here: Conceding the inevitability of death is one of the hardest duties of life. And maybe the longer you put it off -- the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo have been fighting for seven years -- the more difficult it becomes.

Which is why the denouement of this drama has been painful, even for those of us who were not directly involved. Watching the increasingly naked desperation of the fight to keep Terri alive came to feel intrusive and voyeuristic. You wanted to turn away, but there was no place you could go.

So you watched as the Schindlers strained credulity with claims that their daughter tried to say ''I want to live'' even as her feeding tube was removed. And never mind that, five years ago, according to a report in the Miami Herald, the couple openly conceded that Terri was insensate, her brain destroyed.

You watched as the Rev. Jesse Jackson, in a stunning illustration of the axiom about politics and bedfellows, spoke out on behalf of the Schindlers, a boogeyman of the liberal left making common cause with the religious right.

You watched as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay denounced as ''barbarism'' the removal of Terri's feeding tube and trampled the constitutional separation of powers with extraordinary legislative maneuvers to keep her alive, yet neglected to mention that he raised no similar objection 17 years ago when his father suffered a massive head injury and the family decided it was best that the elder DeLay be allowed to die.

You watched as people went just a little bit nuts.

And maybe, if you were the praying type, you said, Hey, God, how about a little help here? When should we stop waiting on the miracle? When is it OK to give up hope?

But God, as far as is known, kept His own counsel. Maybe He felt He'd said what He had to say 15 years ago.

Terri Schiavo's death, hard as it was, feels like mercy. For her and for us. Once again, we can avoid confronting our irresolute feelings and fears.

There is, however, wisdom here, for those to care to seek it. Roughly distilled, it goes like this: to face reality is not to betray faith.

God answers every prayer, a preacher once said.

Sometimes, the answer is no.

 

[Nightfall]

conjur: That link is great and hits the nail right on the head.