Chasing the Wind - Latest Comments in Terri Schiavo

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:43:58 -0000

Michael:
RvW overturned? That particular genie is already out the bottle. If it had come up today I'd be shrieking the state's rights argument on that issue. Color me a closet Federalist. I should have an office pinup of Alexander Hamilton.

As for DeLay's father, he was stricken during the period of Texas' "Natural Death Act" of 1977, which required that physicians perform any and all lifesaving measures unless:
1. Two physicians (one who must be the primary care physician) must agree that the condition is terminal and death would be imminent without lifesaving measures, and...
2. The patient's guardian elects to withold lifesaving measures.
And in that case, they did it, and I do not fault the DeLay family for their decision whatsoever.

Lucky for me, the new Advance Directives Act of 1999 (signed by then-Gov. Bush) allows my wife to pull my plug if the docs concur that my condition is expected to be terminal within six months. While that is not something I look forward to, it gives me peace of mind that I won't be a burden and I'll be allowed to move on with my existence.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Sat, 23 Apr 2005 17:24:33 -0000

I understand the fathers of the constitution could not forsee everything; that's why they setup a system to allow ammendments. Judges do not have the right to interpret things not in the constitution; the ability to change the constitution is reserved for the legislature and the states.

So, Dan, you feel Roe vs Wade should be overturned? That was a state matter. I happen to agree with you.

DeLay's father was on a ventilator, kidney dialysis, had organ failure, and was expected to die shortly. Terri just needed food.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Sat, 23 Apr 2005 15:31:00 -0000

AMM:
Good point about the civil rights enforcement. That was a bad example on my part.

As for Judge Moore, he has in the past let his personal beliefs influence his rulings and courtroom behavior. When running for the Alabama Supreme Ct., one of his campaign promises was to take his courtroom plaque of the Commandments with him. In Feb 2002, he ruled against a woman retaining custody of her three children for the sole reason that she was/is a lesbian. In the opinion which he drafted, he quoted verses from Genesis and Leviticus, as well as citing the death penalty as punishment for homosexuality. Here's a quote from Moore's own opinion:

"The State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this lifestyle, to not encourage a criminal lifestyle."

After losing his Nov 2002 legal battle to keep the monument in the courthouse rotunda, he said:

"Federal district courts have no jurisdiction or authority to prohibit the acknowledgment of God that is specifically recognized in the Constitution of Alabama."

To me, Judge Moore seems "activist" enough when his personal beliefs lead him to flaunt the very laws he was sworn to uphold. It definitely calls into question his impartiality.

Micheal:
The constitution and its drafters could not forsee everything, as evidenced by the amendments to cover things like abolition of slavery, speedy trial, self-incrimination, cruel & unusual punishment, removal of race as a factor in voting, and women's suffrage. Each of those things had to be added after the fact to improve the civil rights standing of the U.S.

As for topics like gay marriage and abortion, I personally feel those should be left up to the states themselves since they are not directly covered in the constitution or current set of amendments. (Amendment #10!)

As for the Terri Schiavo situation, it galled me that Congress intervened in a state matter. It seemed doubly irritating that Tom DeLay wanted to intercede on Schiavo's behalf when DeLay himself agreed to withhold kidney dialysis from his own father who had suffered brain damage in a construction accident.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:50:42 -0000

I understand your point, Dan; judges are supposed to enforce the constitution, and civil rights can easily be supported by the constitution. Prayer in schools, Roe vs Wade, Homosexual marriages, and refusing to protect a woman in a vegetative state after the US Congress specifically passed legislation to do just that is a lot harder to justify in the US Constitution. When the last Supreme Court decision was based on international opinion instead, conservatives have a responsibility to reign in the judiciary.

Re: Terri Schiavo

A.M.M. — Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:52:29 -0000

Well, suspicions aren't always right. The term "activist" is usually reserved for those judges that rule under their own beliefs regardless of what the laws may state.

Roy Moore can't be considered an activist because he didn't make any rulings regarding the monument. Sure, it was still something he wanted to do regardless of laws, but he didn't pass any rulings about it.

The federal judges that "struck down segregation and enforced unpopular civil rights" can't be considered activists either because of that one key word before "unpopular civil rights". They were enforcing laws that already existed, and therefore were not creating their own.

This is not to say republicans can't have their own activists same as the democrats, but they tend to not be as rampant or as numerous as the democratic activists.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:37:28 -0000

The quote is from pc93's own blog. Comparing judges to the Klan was a bit over the top.

Was Alabama's Judge Roy Moore an activist judge for installing a monument to Commandments on the courthouse lawn in the middle of the night? Could the federal judges that struck down segregation and enforced unpopular civil rights laws be considered activist?

I strongly suspect that we hang "activist" moniker on whatever jurist fails to rule in concert with our personal opinion(s).

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:04:43 -0000

I'm not sure where you quoted that from, but I believe activist judges serve the liberal elite. Non-activist judges would be the preference of the conservatives, and practically by definition non-activist judges don't serve anybody.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:42:35 -0000

"Today's black-robed night writers are not unlike the white-robed night riders of our past. Federal judges are elitists who serve the elite."

Would that be the Republican elite or the Democratic elite?

Re: Terri Schiavo

pc93 — Sat, 09 Apr 2005 14:43:09 -0000

Tell the Media to report the REAL Schiavo polls!

http://capwiz.com/sicminc/i...

http://www.emediawire.com/r...

My account, etc. of Terri Schindler's Funeral Mass:

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 15:43:02 -0000

And I've already said I disagree with the court's finding. Actually, it was a single finding over 12 years ago. Everything since then has been an appeal, but there was no way to appeal the original finding that Terri wanted to die, despite ample evidence that called that finding into question.

I read the links you sent, enough to know that there are both similarities and differences. The baby was on life support and suffered a fatal illness and not expected to live anyway. Still, my initial response is that the parents should have been given some way to care for their baby since that's what they wished.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:45:00 -0000

You & I may not be sure, but the courts were. At that point it was entirely out of Michael Schiavo's hands.

Michael:
What was your take on the baby that was taken off life support at Texas Children's Hospital recently? (link)(link)(link)

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:15:09 -0000

See, that's where we differ. If you're not sure, then killing her would be a bad thing. The "niggling" only goes one way.

As I read on one site earlier today, "We weren't really sure one way or the other what Terri wanted, so we decided to starve her to death."

Re: Terri Schiavo

Dan — Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:46:46 -0000

"lets face it there will always be a niggling doubt 'was terri just in the way?'

Let's also face it, there will always be a niggling suspicion that Terri Schiavo really told her husband she would not want to live in a vegetative state.

Godspeed, Terri.

Re: Terri Schiavo

karen — Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:56:26 -0000

im so sorrowed that things have come to this. who can say which life has value? Terri was not brain dead she was severely brain damaged. if someone cared about her and wanted to take on the responsibility for her why not choose life? the claims about her not wanting to live this way came a little late in the whole scheme of things and are just so vague. as far as a husbands rights. i hardly think he is acting as a husband when he is living in a permanent state of adultery (his adultery is a reliquishing of rights biblically speaking and in the civil sense). lets face it there will always be a niggling doubt "was terri just in the way?" terri was not on a respirator, all she was recieving was nutrition and water. if she had truly desired death she would have died a long time ago. sheer will to live has kept her alive. all these people so eager to kill her would be the first ones to raise their voices in protests over the killing of some endangered rodents or insect but cant bring themselves to truly mourn the passing of a human life.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:47:08 -0000

Jimb, those names don't even compare to the offensive stuff that is *not* getting through. Ugh.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Zachary — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:28:35 -0000

This transgression has shaken the foundations of which this Country stands. How is life defined? How much power the federal and state governments hold?
Iâ€™ve been keeping tabs of the insight people have been putting into this sight. I found some outright disturbing, while others have been very interesting. I give my thanks to Michael for making this sight possible; it has given me an up close perspective of the opinions of many diverse people.
In regards to the Schiavo family I send my deepest condolences. I hope that over time the many wounds that have been dealt to the entire family, including Schiavoâ€™s husband, can heal.
I choose not to enter my opinion whether or not Schiavoâ€™s death was justified in the end. This is an impossible judgment to make. Personality I would not want to live while in a vegetate sate, but as I said that would be my wish, perhaps not for Schiavo.
I do wish to sate my belief that the government had no right to intrude on this personal family matter. When something as personal and socially disturbing as this makes national news it can only lead to trouble. Mark my words, Schiavo may be dead, but this transgression is far from over for the religious advocates on the side of keeping Schiavo alive. I truly hope that no hate crimes follow this tragedy. This is a time of healing, not retaliation.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Jimb — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:02:39 -0000

But you are not censoring name calling from the religious point of view? Example..."sorry ass, money hungry, crazy husband of hers get the punsihment he deserves"

Re: Terri Schiavo

Lisa — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:24:44 -0000

God bless Terri Schiavo and may she rest in peace.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Michael — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:13:27 -0000

Now that Terri is dead, I'm being flooded with very offensive anti-religious posts. I'm not allowing these offensive comments to be posted, not for their contrary viewpoint but for the name calling and rude language that these posters feel inclined to use.

Feel free to post your opinion, either pro or con, but be respectful of the other posters and their beliefs.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Jimb — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:08:42 -0000

Again with the name calling. Alicia knows absolutely nothing about the husband other than what she hears bantered about the radio or TV by other people who don't know anything about him. I have no idea if he is a good guy or not, but am pretty sure he didn't do this for money. He could have "sold" Terry many times which is what others have suggested he do. He refused all offers of money.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on these issues, but please, become informed with the facts. how many of you have read the original decision of Judge Greers finding that Terry would not want ot live in a vegetative state? Is it shocking that a person wouldn't want to live like that? And to suggest that the "government" is doing this to Terry is stunning, given that both the Florida legislature and the US Congress tried to intervene into an otherwise personal issue on behalf of the PARENTS!

Let's not believe all the talking heads out there. Saying there are disputes about her condition doesn't make it so. Saying her husband abused her (in the ocmplete absence of any evidence by the way) doesn't make it true. Learn the real facts, not the myths, and then decide. Reasonable people can still disagree, just do it knowledgeably.

Re: Terri Schiavo

patti — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 23:36:28 -0000

get a clue??? seriously, he has been devoted to her and visit and takes care of her. Put yourself in his shoes he was very young when this happened , did you expect his life to stop because hers did, she was obviously unhappy with herself to begin with to have an eating disorder that was so out of control that she would actually have the imbalance which caused her heart attack. Nobody hurt her the night before this all happened except for herself. She had to have had this disorder for years!!!! Whats wrong is mom feeling guilty because she could'nt help her then and now she gets to everyday. I don't think that anyone of you would want to live like this and I can bet that after this case you will all make sure of it, or at least make your request know to several people, dont tell me you haven't laid awake at night and rolled over and said to your spouse, please dont let me live like that, please!

Re: Terri Schiavo

Alicia — Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:05:08 -0000

:cry: My heart go out to the family of Terri Schiavo. I really hate the fac t that our live are dictated and controlled by others and exspecially the goverment. I pray that Terri shock them all and come out and tell the truth and shock the goverment and that sorry ass, money hungry, crazy husband of hers get the punsihment he deserves.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Jimb — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:42:32 -0000

Pam...what an incredibly un-christian view you hold.

Re: Terri Schiavo

Jimb — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:38:28 -0000

Lot's of issues trouble me in this, but here is the biggest one. If I express to my wife that I do not want to be kept alive if I am in a vegetative state, do my parents have the right to keep me alive against my wishes, or is my spouse entitled to uphold my wishes. If, and its an uncertain if I agree, but if Terry did express her wishes to her husband, it seems to me that her parents religious views, and there incredible love for their daughter, can't override that.
Other issues that bother me. the influence of religious beliefs on medical opinions. Some of the "experts" saying she is not in a vegetative state have never seen a CT scan, but oppose the entire diagnoses of PVS. Hmmm.
I can't figure out what is in this for the husband. Not money, he has apparently been offered millions to let her live. So what then...
Why the name calling? There are serious issues involved here that deserve to be discussed and debated, but I have heard people on both sides, but particularly the right resort to name calling and character assassination. It disappoints me in my own party.

Re: Terri Schiavo

sarah a. — Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:13:54 -0000

:smile:I'm glad you had a wonderful Easter!
have a great day you guys