Death Sentence Upheld

The death culture wins...

Federal judge refuses to rescind order removing Terri's feeding tube:

A federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, denying an emergency request from the brain-damaged woman's parents.

Democrats should be ecstatic... now they can return to saving baby seals, turtle eggs and insects... and ignoring a mentally handicapped woman...

Ain't life grand?

Comments

[Michelle]

Let Terri's suffering end! There is no need for her to suffer any more.

Would this be different if there was proof on paper that she requested that she be allowed to die in a case like this?

I mean, her parents have said in court that they would ignore and tear up anything like that, that they would refuse to recognize her right to determine her own life even if she *had* left a living will...

Is the problem really that some people say that she would want to die, and others don't? Is the problem that some people can't decide whose claim is more credible as to Terri's wishes? Or is it just that some folks can't stand the idea of someone being 'killed' even if it's their own choice?

[Ian]

Brutally honest? OK Ironic how Terri starved herself into bulima and now she is being starved. As the wise saying goes be careful what you wish for you just might get it!

[Joseph [Detroit Mich]]

Have doubts whether Terri should LIVE or die….go to this site…and see for yourself.

http://www.blogsforterri.com/video.php

Select this link and then the link titled “Decide” for a short video….see if she looks and sounds brain dead to you…seeing and hearing is believing.

Many people are confined to a bed, etc. but that doesn’t mean they are useless…and with the proper therapy Terri could have a good life…after she gets away from her husband (sic).

[Jeff H]

Ian: no medically sound evidence that Terri had an eating disorder. None.

Anonymous poster: the problem is that there is NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE, concerning Terri's alleged wishes to die, that comes from any source other than Michael Schiavo. NOT ONE SHRED. And the courts have the authority, though for whatever reasons they fail to use it, to remove custody from guardians who have a conflict of interest with the patient's best interests--like collecting insurance payments from a death caused at the behest of the guardian!!! And Michael has made it clear that he is maintaining the sham of being married to Terri for one purpose only: to maintain legal standing as her guardian just long enough to get state sanctioned approval to kill her.

Michelle: who are you to decide that Terri's suffering, whatever it is, outweighs what may or may not be her wishes to go on living? That's an audacity befitting the worst of the Pharisees. Legalism--and redress to the courts for the purposes of furthering an agenda of death, are no substitute for Christian compassion.

hey JeffH, you didn't answer the question.

I asked, would YOU EVEN CARE if she had written paper? If she did, would the neoconthugs shut the hell up?

Oh, and the court documents I read showed that there were other person's recollections about Terri's statement (at a funeral, and NOT TO MICHAEL), that she would have hated to live in a vegetative state.

So, yeah, there's your shred of evidence, in that paperwork. If you had read it.

Other persons, OTHER THAN MICHAEL SCHIAVO, said that Terri had said she would never have wanted to live like that.

The courts already recorded that.

So take a damn chill already, sparky.

First you say no medically sound evidence as to an eating disorder (wrong on that count, sparky, where did YOU intern?) then you say NO evidence other than Michael that she said she didn't want to be a vegetable.

Where are you reading about this case anyway, Mad Magazine?

Oh, and as for Pharisees/Christians, it seems that the Christian thing to do would to look at the evidence (even if not captured on paper), make an honest (not based on 4 minutes of cleverly edited video) decision about the woman's status, and then decide.

Rather than letting your obvious religious-theocratic Cotton Mather-wannabe bias get in the way of letting someone die with dignity.

Chumpy, that.

[Mike R.]

This is in response to the nameless jerk and his or her unintelligent posts.

"I asked, would YOU EVEN CARE if she had written paper? If she did, would the neoconthugs shut the hell up?"

The answer is, Hell no, I wouldn't care. You don't have to be a doctor to see that this woman is not in a vegetative state. I think we can all agree that there are conflicting medical opinions on whether or not Ms. Schiavo even has a chance to recover. My question to you is: What the hell is the rush to put this woman to death? The obvious answer is that her loving husband is a scumbag. He can certainly go on and live his life however the hell he wants without starving his wife to death.

So Sparky, I see that your standard to put someone to death is based on "evidence" presented by some unknown persons that heard Ms. Schiavo make some statement at a funeral that she didn't want to live in a vegetative state. If you had a clue (which obviously you don't), these statements wouldn't and shouldn't carry any real weight in a courtroom. The evidence to put someone to death is beyond a reasonable doubt. You can't possibly believe that these so called "statements" could bring you to that standard. Or is that anti-Christian, pro-choice, tree-hugging, French attitude of yours clouding your judgment? Jeez Mr. Sparky, I think you have all of the qualities to be a judge in Florida. Spineless and heartless.