Terri Schiavo is going to die because Michael Schiavo has better lawyers.
Exhibit #1) This article in the St. Petersburg Times (Memories diverge on what Terri wanted), explains it all.
On the Monday in January 2000 when the Schiavo case went to trial, the Schindlers’ lawyer remembers being surprised to see a St. Petersburg Times reporter in court.
What are you doing here, Patricia Campbell asked. She had no anticipation that the case would make the front page.
Back then, Campbell was working alone, without an assistant to help. On the other side was Michael Schiavo’s lawyer, George Felos, who had handled the seminal right-to-die case of Estelle Browning, which went to the Florida Supreme Court in 1990.
Campbell said in an interview Wednesday that she took the case out of sympathy for the Schindlers. She said about 20 attorneys had turned down the couple, who had little money.
Campbell, who now has a prestigious AV rating from the Martindale-Hubbell lawyer peer review system, had never handled a right-to-die case. She did not have money to find witnesses, she said. Indeed, Campbell did not take depositions from Joan and Scott Schiavo before the trial. Normally, that would be a basic step for a lawyer preparing for trial.
Campbell presented just two witnesses to address the claim that Terri would not want her feeding tube removed.
[More]Exhibit #2) This morning Florida’s Department of Children and Families missed an opportunity to legally take custody of Terri Schiavo. WFTS reports:
Wednesday afternoon, Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer issued a temporary restraining order, preventing DCF from removing Terri from the Pinellas Park hospice where her life-sustaining feeding tube has been disconnected.
This morning at 8, DCF filed an appeal to Greer’s order. When they did so, an automatic stay of the order went into effect, meaning that they could intervene.
The attorney for Terri’s husband Michael (George Felos), who opposes any attempts to prolong Terri’s life, said he suspected DCF wasn’t aware of that stay until he had filed a motion for a new restraining order.Legally Terri’s family was never able to recover from that one day in court 5 years ago. Felos was just rubbing salt in the wound this morning as he continued his legal dominance…
Good point.
Dumb Shit: You should have stopped here. Do you even read the crap you spew? Hate Christians Hate religion, hate Neocons Hate Hate Hate. You pretend to rail against fanaticism when you are a fanatic. And you call others bizarre? Lol!
And these long antireligious diatribes of yours: No one reads that crap. It comes across as crazy. Crazy and boring. You’re a real whacko. Ever other word you type has some sort of religious connotation. Get therapy.
Thanks David B. And thanks to Kevin, Paul and Jay for finally posting something different today; it was quite refreshing.
I will enjoy my peace today – thanks.
Cindy
No you won’t. What makes you think there won’t be subsequent posts on Schiavo? In fact, I think I see one now! lol!
NO I DON’T BITCH. I COME HERE, READ THE POST, NOT THE COMMENTS, THEN COMMENT IF NEED BE. I MAY BE THE LONGEST CINDY HERE BUT I’M NOT THE ONLY CINDY. GOES TO SHOW YOU HOW THE HELL SMART YOU ARE, YOU ASS.
What’s a day without at least one nonsensical post by cindy. lol!
I’m going to take DavidB and Allium’s advice and have a peaceful day. WHY DO YOU TROLL HERE?? Bloody hell, wish you’d go elsewhere and if you put me down again, imagine my arm coming out of your computer to give you the hardest slap I know you deserve.
If you don’t like reading what I post, you can always read and post elsewhere. Oh wait, you already do. Here’s some of your fan mail:
CINDY:
I’ve seen you comment on everything all over the blogosphere. Is there ANYTHING you haven’t claimed to know personally? Sorry, you’re full of BS and have no idea what you’re talking about. This isn’t about you (nor are the infinite number of other topics you claim to be involved in) so don’t think you automatically know WTF is going on. WHY don’t you get your own blog and see how many people give a rat’s ass about your claims to have personal knowledge of everything? Why don’t you do like Henry and not comment since you OBVIOUSLY DON’T KNOW JACK ABOUT THIS CASE.
Think I’m wrong?Google “firstbrokenangel”
Posted by: notcindy at March 21, 2005 09:39 AM
CHAD’S BEEN HAD!
Wow DS. I disagree with a lot of what you wrote about neo-christianity etc., but your summary of the case was excellent. The bad thing is this is one of those issues that has moved beyond the ability for rational discussion, so I think you wasted a lot of time. The people that are inclined to agree with you have already agreed, those who are not won’t. It will however be interesting to see how long it takes before you are attacked for posting it.
Well I appreciate that observation Chad.
I guess this falls under the category of attacking him for posting it. It is not his summary. He cut and pasted it from someone else’s website. Then he has the nerve to take credit for it! Why does his lack of ethics not surprise me?
There is no risk of perjury in lying or exaggerating on blogs or to the press. You can basically say pretty much anything out here in the media world you want, with little legal risk outside of libel, and libel is a notoriously difficult charge to prove.
How about theft of intellectual property? Is it okay to post other people’s work as your own and take credit for it?????
S
Maybe because it is such a simple definition to find, and because they just don’t want to hear your rationalization of a different definition, people have not responded.
But here ya go . . .
Murder – The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Notice the use of the word unlawful.
Since this decision was authorized by the court, a court of law, it is not unlawful. Therefore it does not take a large leap of logic to make the correct determination that a murder is not happening.
Another interesting point, which has been conveniently left out here, is that Michael’s standing in this issue is not one of spouse, but guardian. A decision that the Schindler’s had no problem with all those years ago when it was decided. It has been carefully avoided by those who want to denigrate him, “What kind of husband is he?” “What right does he have, he is only the husband?”
Your responses are always so interesting for a number of reasons, but the most recent are a hoot.
In one you appear to champion the use of emotion and then not more then 3 or 4 minutes later you criticize someone for using emotion in a response.
You are either an obvious hypocrite or someone who needs some kind of help.
In reference to your thinking someone may be suffering from depression, you, of all people, may want to look inward prior to thinking someone else needs professional help.
I can hardly wait for your clear, thoughtful, reply.
Paul said:
“Of the many ironies generated by the case … two currently stand out. The first is that what originally seemed an overwhelmng victory for conservatives – … has now exposed a deep conflict in conservatism itself. At issue is a dilemma for many of George Bush’s strongest supporters. Are they primarily social conservatives – in which case they back the federal government’s move to keep Mrs Schiavo alive at all costs? Or are they primarily constitutional or “federalist” conservatives – in which case they dislike Washington imposing itself over the decision of state courts, a precedent that conservatives would bitterly resist if it was pursued by a Democratic congress or by a liberal president?”
An excellent point (and may I say how deeply appreciative I am to see the tone of the discourse having taken a salutory turn) — This point has been screaming off the comments section for weeks, and I troubles me to no end.
It has also troubled me (probably because I am a lawyer) that some social conservatives in these comments have expressed such suspicion (if not contempt) for the Rule of Law, and its (multiple, consistent) applications in this instance.
I learned a moment ago from DS’s comment that Judge Greer is “known among his peers not just as being a member of the religous right, they jokingly say he is the religious right. Until just recently he was a member in good standing with the Florida GOP and Christian Coalition.”
Not having had time to look into his background this week, I am now more stunned that ever by the bitter invective spewed his way by those so outraged by his actions. Everything I have been able to read (from unbiased sources, I tried) about the legal issues and process that has taken place here compels a rational conclusion that Judge Greer applied to law to the facts and made a difficult ruling; and that his handling of the case has been supported every step of the way by the dozens of other judges that have had a hand in the case. And yet some conclude that the entire judicial system has run amok — JUDICIAL TYRRANY!! — and we need to change the Constitution to TAKEN BACK OUR COUNTRY!!
Of course, there will be lawyers responding who will tell me, as Randall Terry’s lawyer was telling Sean Hannity last night on the radio, that I am wrong, that Judge Greer abused his position, etc. That’s the problem with lawyers. If you have one, you have peace. If you have two, you have a lawsuit.
This is neither healthy nor, in my view, rational.
There will be a (hopefully healthy) debate, anew, on the legal issue of “substituted judgment,” and that is a good thing. It should take place in legislatures across the country, and if social conservatives are successful in some places, those are meaningful victories.
But Paul is right — conservatives are going to have to figure out how to live with one another in a way they haven’t had to worry about. And the Republican Party will have a tiger by the tail if it does not devise a way to avoid the persistent cross-pressuring of (a huge part of) its base.
julie ranted . . .
Dumb Shit: You should have stopped here. Do you even read the crap you spew? Hate Christians Hate religion, hate Neocons Hate Hate Hate. You pretend to rail against fanaticism when you are a fanatic. And you call others bizarre? Lol!
And these long antireligious diatribes of yours: No one reads that crap. It comes across as crazy. Crazy and boring. You’re a real whacko. Ever other word you type has some sort of religious connotation. Get therapy.
ROTFLMAO
It sort of obvious you read it, so who is the wacko now? Check the mirror in case you don’t know . . .
I love the careful well thought out responses, it is very entertaining.
(Well, let me amend my statement about the quality of the discourse…I spoke too soon)
That’s a cogent post Wavemaker. But how does one live with extremist elements of the religious right if they basically cannot get along with anyone else? Note Julie’s attacks against me for simply presenting the case history. I’ve said repeatedly I’d would have let the Schindlers assume care of Schiavo were it up to me, and that starving her to death troubles me even if I agree the court decision must be observed. She doesn’t care that those are the facts, she simply seeks to discredit anyone who disagree with her religious fundamentalist view, and she’s fairly mild compared to some I encounter. In this case she’s zeroed in on me because I was aducious enough to question the rational of the religous right.
You’ve noted their MO, attack, smear, distort, lie, dripping vitriol, etc, and pass it on. It doesn’t matter who is the target, the facts are irrelevant, ethics are unobserved, morality is not an issue for them, accuracy is not a factor in their calculus. Attack, smear, distort, lie, spew venom and hatred, spread it on. How does one ‘get along’ with people like this? It takes two to get along. If you and I are sitting here noting the facts, i.e. Greer is a social conservative with an impeccable reputation among both liberals and conserative lawmakers and peers (Not an easy reputation to get I’d have to guess) for his consistency in applying the principles of jurisprudence … meanwhile the fanatics are calling him a murderer, a liberal stooge, demanding he be fired, some are recommending he be arrested and placed in prison, and a few have even hinted he should be lynched by a mob and hung or shot. I’m not trying to be a dick here, but how the hell does one ‘get along’ with those kinds of people? I don’t think we can Wave, at the very least, it’s not something we can control, they have to be willing to get along with the rest of the world.
Hey DS, let’s get something straight. I ain’t takin sides in your beef with julie. It’s just not worth it.
It’s still a good summary and it still doesn’t change the fact that this issue has moved into a highly emotional realm. I would point out that since I don’t know nor have any interest in who DS is he may have written the original too. Now if that indicates that I have been had so be it.
No I copied the case history from the case history. I wrote the prior summary.
Julie, and anyone else who think they’re somehow helping the nation by screwing up our freedoms, I have no problem with you stating whatever you wish, even if it’s grossly inaccurate and inflammatory. Believe me, I’ve been attacked by forces far more effective and subtle than your efforts here. I can only guess based on your words, I don’t know you and those words here are all I have to go by. But judging by your words, you seem to be a passionate individual and that’s an admirable quality. But I think you may be a little screwed up regarding the nature of freedom and democracy and what it takes to maintain it. It’s not an easy thing to keep alive and spread to others. We are our own worst enemy when it comes to securing our liberty and keeping it safe.
Liberty has to be universal. There is no other way which works. People have tried all kinds of methods to do it, but the only one that works over time is to let people say stuff freely, and act freely, even if it makes your blood boil and your hands shake in anger-as long as they do not inflict damage on your own right to say what you wish and act as you wish. That’s why even though I think you’re rather misguided and at times downright scary, I’d stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you demanding your right to say what you want (This Blog is actually not under the aegis of the US Constitution, and Paul can ban or censor anyone he wants because it his private property, but hopefully yo get what I’m driving at). I’d be very uncomfortable living in a nation which restricted that right. Your right.
Same for religious freedom. For all of us to have that cherished liberty requires that all of us be allowed to worship or reject whatever flavor of religion we like. That’s what freedom means Julie; it means freedom for all.
People disagree on the borders of the gray area where one man’s freedom encroaches on the rights of another man’s freedom. But despite getting a bad rap from almost every side, the courts do a reasonably good job of defining those boundaries and their decisions are always open to revision, so I think it works fairly well.
The framers of the Constitution were wise. They knew that a majority rule if left unchecked could turn into a tyranny, just like any other oligarchy or theocracy which they were trying to rise above. If majority rule had no restrictions, then the people of giant Virginia could outvote the people of tiny Massachusetts, and vote to take their land and turn them all into slaves. So they enacted safeguards against that by detailing a Bill of Rights that the government could not violate. One of those was that the Federal Government could not encourage or discourage any particular religion. This was done because back then, even what we’d consider minor difference between Methodists and Quakers was a more looming issue than today. So the best solution, which everyone ended up agreeing on, was for the government to stay completely out of the religion business. You see experience and common sense had taught them that the opportunity to misuse religious prejudice for political gain was too great to be allowed to exist. That Separation issue has been abused, challenged, misused, ignored, and so on, so you can imagine how awful it might have been had it been written into the Constitution that you had to abide by the majority religious vote. The nation would have torn itself apart early on, and we would not be having this discussion.
The Founding Fathers were considered radical liberal trouble makers in their day for daring to suggest that the common citizen had such rights above the state, and that the state served the citizen rather than the other way around. Kings and Queens, Dictators and Warlords, scoffed at them and set about to ridicule and destroy them. The most powerful nation on earth, England, set out to crush them.
But they prevailed, and the idea[s] caught on like wildfire and swept the world. Within a few decades the idea of religious and political freedom, and democracy, was so popular that even Royalties which had persisted for generations in our European homelands and set atop enormous structures of entrenched wealth and power, were forced to offer similar liberties to their own people; all started by a handful of political radicals here in the New World.
Even today many nations struggle with democracy. It’s gives me goosebumps to think that right now, our men and women are still giving their lives so that the people in the fertile crescent, who bequeathed unto the rest of us the gift of the written word, are now, finally, receiving the greatest gift that written word produced: Freedom and Democracy. Right now, in Iraq, we’re still losing brave Americans who are carrying that work on and paying for it with the ultimate sacrifice.
Those men, our founding fathers, changed the entire globe, not with swords, or money, or cannons, or ships, but with the power of an idea that was so damn good, everyone else wanted in on it. And that’s what makes our nation so unique; our freedoms are legally guaranteed by the US Constitution and we were the first to do it. Every judge, lawmaker, governor, President, executive advisor, and US soldier and marine is sworn to protect that document with their lives. And many millions have given their lives to insure that you and I enjoy that liberty.
So when you or any other David Koresh wanna be go off on one of your rants, I just smile and take solace in the fact that I live in a nation where you’re allowed to do so, where we’re all allowed to do so, and I feel pretty good about it. But honey pie, if you think we, and by we I mean democrats, republicans, independents, socialists, atheists, theists, scientists, metal workers, secretaries, mechanics, and the entire body politic, in this nation are going to stand idly by while a small minority of religious fundamentalist destroy that freedom so many have sacrificed to maintain, and is mankind’s greatest hope; You are absolutely, totally, fucking out of your mind. It will never happen Julie. Get used to that fact.
Angel, um… nobody is actually claiming that Terri is brain dead. You do realize that, right? A brain dead person requires a respirator. Terri breathes on her own.
DS I tuned out that rant of yours, coz it kinda goes on for a while. I noticed the phrase “religious fundamentalist” though and that was interesting.
I am atheist, and a lifelong, diehard abortion-rights supporter–and this case has caused me to realize that perhaps only a Right to Life amendment would protect a woman like Terri from being murdered legally by her husband.
And yes, I do know what that does to the abortion rights cause.
Bostonian that’s your right, to say what you feel. I doubt such an Ammendment will ever pass under this WH and Congress for oen simple reason; cost. Here in Florida where I live, we have quite a few folks always tragically on the precipice of death. A Constitutional Amm’t of the kind you sugegst would be pretty tricky to word, and I’d guess it would mean that the state or the fed wold end up having to foot the bill, and that bill would balloon enormously as the baby boomers age. Possibly into the hundreds of billions or trillions. The current powers that be are moving in the opposite direction, slashing anything like that, so it’s a worthwhile solution, but don’t hold your breath.
Did Terri say to Michael what he claims she said, and IF SO, has he correctly interpreted that for this situation? (Some people see no difference at all between brain death and severe brain damage; others see a world of difference. How would Terri have seen it?)
It is a plain fact Florida used a lower standard of evidence here than it would for an accused criminal.
The standard of evidence used was “clear and convincing” and there was no jury. In criminal cases, the standard is higher (“beyond reasonable doubt”) and there must be a jury.
S9, DS, others:
When we do not clearly know the wishes of a person like Terri Schiavo, should we assume that these people feel as you do? Is that just?
I could misunderstand you, but you seem to be arguing that it doesn’t matter too much what Terri’s wishes actually are.
Does the government get to decide when innocent people should die?
DS, a right to life amendment would not indicate who picks up the bill. It would merely prevent the government from taking innocent life or allowing innocent life from being taken deliberately.
Your cost argument, in other words, is bogus.
It’s not my argument Bostonian. I’d be perfectly happy to give you idea a shot. But it’s not so cut and dry as you make it out to be imo.
First, it’s just the economic facts. Someone would have to pay, and this stuff costs a lot of money. Should we keep people alive to the last possible second regardless of their own wishes or those nearest them? Should we force the insurance companies or medicare to pay, or should we foreclose on their relatives assets to cover the bill, or lay it on the taxpayers, locally, state wide, or federally? Would it be Consitutional to do any or all of that? What if the public overwhelmingly opposes such a measure, as seems to be the situation in this case? Do you really think politicians are going to back when 83 % of the public thinks Congress is out of line even getting involved?
Is it Consitutional to make states or local municpalities pay for Federal mandates, or vice versa? When the patient is at least partially to blame for their own predictament, do the same rules apply; if for example their condition was the result of a crack overdose, driving drunk, or comitting a crime? Who decides these matters, courts, congress, the spouse, the parents, the legal guardian, the children, the governor, the President? What if one or more parties diagree, who decides then? What if the pateint has a living will mandating they be allowed to die, would you still force them to accept your provision? Would it afect the process, or should it, if Schiavo was 90 years old, or age six, or an illegal alien? Your idea is a fine start in that at least it proposes a solution and a standard, and I’m happy to hear you out, but you haven’t given me enough info and detail to have a good idea of what it is you’re advocating.
BTW Bostonian, I know the thread is long so it’s no big deal. But I’ve said repeatedly if I were the judge able to act as I please, I’d let her parents assume her care. But we can’t have folks go charging off taking the law into their own hands everyt time they dion’t like a ruling, especially when the vast majority feels that ruling is both reasonable, moral, and just.
ROTFLMAO It sort of obvious you read it,
nope. his crap is unreadable.
so who is the wacko now?
Uh, you are.
Check the mirror in case you don’t know . . .
I tried, but your reflection keeps getting in the way. . .
Note Julie’s attacks against me for simply presenting the case history.
No, Julie attacked you because you STOLED SOMEONE ELSE’S WORK OFF THEIR BLOG AND PRETENDED IT WAS YOUR OWN. And if you don’t see anything wrong with that, try doing it to Kevin, Paul, or Jay wrote.
Dumbshit, I object you your foaming anti-religion rants and just your foaming period. And as I have told you more than once, I’m not religious. In fact, I’m an atheist. I’m just sick and tired of today’s penchant for Christian bashing. It’s kneejerk, unwarranted, and a sign of a sick mind — YOURS.
It’s still a good summary and it still doesn’t change the fact that this issue has moved into a highly emotional realm. I would point out that since I don’t know nor have any interest in who DS is he may have written the original too. Now if that indicates that I have been had so be it.
Would you be interested in buying a bridge? Ah, never mind. If you thought it was so good, you would complement the person who wrote it – not DS.
No I copied the case history from the case history. I wrote the prior summary.
No, you ripped off someone else’s blog. You removed the hyperlinks so it would look like you wrote it. And then you took credit and complements for it by Had Chad.
There was no “prior summary” It was just another one of your long diatribes ranting and railing against religion and everything else. That was the immediate clue that you didn’t write the timeline because there was none of your characteristic foaming.
Julie, and anyone else who think they’re somehow helping the nation by screwing up our freedoms,
Do you realize how nutty this sounds? People don’t agree with you and you say they are attacking democracy or screwing up “our freedoms”. Yeah yeah, life as we know it will come to an end if people don’t agree with you. Screwed up? I’m not the one foaming thousands of word per post. Fess up, I bet you have a bunker somewhere.
So when you or any other David Koresh wanna be go off on one of your rants,
Again, do you read the crap you write? Print it out and show it to a few people on the street and see them run. Better yet, take it to an emergency room and show it to a doctor there. Bring a toothbrush.
-S- wrote:
unfortunately, you miss entirely the worth and value of what “emotional reasoning” is. And, for those of us who have capacity to realize when and how to apply it and when not to.
I very much know the worth and value of emotional reasoning. Fortunately, it has no place in the law. While you may have the “capacity” to realize when to apply it, it doesn’t seem like you’re using that capacity.
Emotion and emotional reasoning is not a bad thing, and actually contributes a great deal to creativity. And to just about every aspect of human civilization.
I agree completely. But the law is not a novel or a painting. It does not bend to emotion.
No one’s yet been able to explain away not applying the word, “murder” to Terri Schiavo.
Try a dictionary.
-S- wrote:
I puzzle as to comments such as yours, however, that accomplish nothing but sorta place darkness and depression and the down side of converssation out there instead.
On the other hand, Julie, who posts vitriolic, obscenity-filled personal attacks with nary an intellectual thought, is worthy of your praise. Methinks you need to work on your “emotional reasoning”.
Uhh Julie that is the case history that is making the rounds. It’s on comments on several Blogs right now, they don’t link it either. It’s a matter of public record. I never said I wrote it, and if you assumed otherwise, that’s really not my problem, and perhaps you should have asked first if you wanted to know, before flying off the rails.
And if you’re an atheist, please do me and the rest of us atheists a favor, stop arguing on our behalf or claiming association with us. You’re embaressing to a number of us, and we don’t want your help or support hon. Personally, based on your rants and immature behavior, I think you’re lying about that. But you have the right to lie babe 😉
Brian:
What are you, 10 years old? Mommy! Mommy! She’s doing it, too! Jeesh.
Hey, if you can’t take it, then don’t dish it out.
S. has her approach, and I have mine – which does not include talking to walls that talk back.
Uhh Julie that is the case history that is making the rounds.
It doesn’t matter who you stole it from because you still took someone’s else’s property and misrepresented it as your own. And anyway, you stole it from the guy who wrote it. THIEF!
It’s a matter of public record.
I love your excuses for your bad behavior. What’s your next excuse? That you just “found it.” lol.
I never said I wrote it, and if you assumed otherwise, that’s really not my problem, and perhaps you should have asked first if you wanted to know, before flying off the rails.
Chad: Wow DS. I disagree with a lot of what you wrote about neo-christianity etc., but your summary of the case was excellent.
You: Well I appreciate that observation Chad.
Then of course there was your reluctance to fess up when caught. You have the ethics of a snake.
And if you’re an atheist, please do me and the rest of us atheists a favor, stop arguing on our behalf or claiming association with us.
Oh, I would never claim association or associate with you. My belief or lack of belief is not a fanatical substitute for religion. Sick sick sick you are. You say you are an atheist but you’re really just what you profess to hate – a religious fanatic.
You’re embaressing to a number of us, and we don’t want your help or support hon.
Because I’ve caught you stealing from other peoples website? Good!
Because I point out that your posts are nothing but hell fire and brimstone? Good.
Personally, based on your rants and immature behavior, I think you’re lying about that.
More proof that it’s really a religion for you!
But you have the right to lie babe 😉
But, you don’t have the right to steal. And on that I’m not lying. THIEF!
Happy Easter Julie…or whatever.
How come the president and congress are getting involve???
The judges haved acted according to the law, as cruel as it may sound, President bush and his little brother dont really care about Terry or her parents, they care about all of those right wing christian votes from the south. President Bush while being Governor of Texas passed a law denying the families of patients in a coma/vegetative status to keep them alive (connected).
What about if bush had agreed on stem cell research maybe Terry would be alright now
She is a hoot ins’t she? Julie I will be bashing facsist elements of all religions for the rest of time. If that upsets you sweetie, perhaps you should aboid reading my posts?
You also said: “I’m not the one foaming thousands of word per post.“. Perhaps you should consider learning to construct posts containing more than a few incoherent self contradictions? There are online classes available, you can start you own Blog, or take a formal writing class. Any or all of which will sharpen your writing skills and probably also serve as effective therapy to help you through this tough time of personal growth and change you seem to be experiencing.
In between the lines I read an individual who is harboring some deeply held anger and pain.
Note your very first post addressed me and was quite smugly arrogant, I did not pick a fight with you. I did not respond or so much as mention your name. Your second comment to me was even more hostile, vulgar, and arrogantly smug. Again I did not respond. Your third comment directed at me began with “~DS~Stands for dumb shit, right?”. In between these cries for attention you treated pretty much everyone else to the same gifted prose who dared to voice their own opinion. Julie, I’m trying to say this gently and not sound like a dick or condecsending; this is a Blog with a comments section. Comments are generally welcome in such venues. And that means on hotly debated issues, a comment section will generate statements you disagree with … You are what is known as a troll. And unlike the past masters of days gone by, you’re such an incompetent troll that I didn’t even recognize you at first. I remember in the old days, when a troll tried to be the best darn troll they could be. They were true craftsman back then, nothing like the amateurs we have to put up with now.
Now, serioulsy, I was baiting you a bit before, but I’m worried about you. Although you try to come off like an unpleasent little peon, I think you have some kind of issues, or you wouldn’t be so hostile to people you don’t even know, out of the blue, who aren’t even talking to you. I think it’s probably unhealthy for me to say anything negative about you, so I won’t. But whatever it is that is causing your behavior to be so erratic is no one’s fault here. Maybe I just caught you on a shitty day and you’re not normally like this. But if this is your normal MO, your behavior only makes sense if you have a mental problem, albiet a minor one, I don’t mean to imply you’re crazy, or you’re very young and probably shouldn’t be participating in adult matters.
I think it would be best if you pursued help and satisfaction with your issues with folks that care about you, rather than spouting off to strangers and becoming the Blog clown. You can get attention without making people dislike you sweetie.
Now look, if you can put together something halfway rational without trying lamely to insult me in response, I’ll be happy to continue exchanging viewpoints with you in a productive manner. If not, I think it would be in your best interests for me to dismiss your comemnts going forward and not play into your drama.
All i know is if Michael Shiavo is allowed to murder his wife with the courts help it will not end here there will be others just like abortions their will be husbands and wives claiming that their disabled mates last wishes were to die just watch this is the beginning of a new day every one and(YOU COULD BE NEXT)so get a living will Terri did’nt have one
Happy Easter Julie…or whatever.
Posted by: sick-of-julie’s-nonstop-vile-hatred at March 25, 2005 10:17 PM
Hi, Dumb Shit!
______________________________________
She is a hoot ins’t she?
Talking to yourself?
Julie I will be bashing facsist elements of all religions for the rest of time. If that upsets you sweetie, perhaps you should aboid reading my posts?
Oh, Lord, now I’m a fascist because I fingered you for a thief and I don’t hate Christians!
You also said: “I’m not the one foaming thousands of word per post.”. Perhaps you should consider learning to construct posts containing more than a few incoherent self contradictions?
So, I could foam like you? No thanks.
There are online classes available, you can start you own Blog, or take a formal writing class.
Any or all of which will sharpen your writing skills and probably also serve as effective therapy to help you through this tough time of personal growth and change you seem to be experiencing.
Nah, I get paid too much for what I do. And anyway, you’re the hater: HateChristians HateNeocons. Neocon, that’s code for jew, isn’t it?
In between the lines I read an individual who is harboring some deeply held anger and pain.
In between your lines I read an individual who is trying to deflect from their own bad and whacked out behavior.
Note your very first post addressed me and was quite smugly arrogant,
No, I called you dumb shit, bc you were a dumb shit.
I did not pick a fight with you.
No, you were being a disgusting pig to someone else at the time.
I did not respond or so much as mention your name. Your second comment to me was even more hostile, vulgar, and arrogantly smug.
Not as vulgar, hostile, and smug as you.
Again I did not respond. Your third comment directed at me began with “~DS~Stands for dumb shit, right?”. In between these cries for attention you treated pretty much everyone else to the same gifted prose who dared to voice their own opinion. J
Just calling you out, dumb shit. I knew you knew your name. And I get along quite well with a number of the people who posted on this thread. But, they don’t shit over everybody like you.
Julie, I’m trying to say this gently and not sound like a dick or condecsending;
Too late. Not only do you sound like one, you are one!
this is a Blog with a comments section. Comments are generally welcome in such venues. And that means on hotly debated issues, a comment section will generate statements you disagree with … You are what is known as a troll.
Nah, I just don’t put up with fools. Oh, and you are known as, well actually you are a whacko: Hate Christians. Hate Neocons (jews) HateHateHate. That’s you, Bunker Boy.
And unlike the past masters of days gone by, you’re such an incompetent troll that I didn’t even recognize you at first. I remember in the old days, when a troll tried to be the best darn troll they could be. They were true craftsman back then, nothing like the amateurs we have to put up with now.
That’s your problem, dumbshit! Too much time on the intenet!
Now, serioulsy, I was baiting you a bit before,
Making yourself look like an idiot is baiting me?
but I’m worried about you. Although you try to come off like an unpleasent little peon, I think you have some kind of issues, or you wouldn’t be so hostile to people you don’t even know, out of the blue, who aren’t even talking to you.
I know you by the crap you post. Be concerned with yourself, you ethically challenged whacko. HateHateHate, Bunker Boy. That’s all you have posted. The Christians are out to get you! Oh, my!
I think it’s probably unhealthy for me to say anything negative about you, so I won’t. But whatever it is that is causing your behavior to be so erratic is no one’s fault here. Maybe I just caught you on a shitty day and you’re not normally like this. But if this is your normal MO, your behavior only makes sense if you have a mental problem, albiet a minor one, I don’t mean to imply you’re crazy, or you’re very young and probably shouldn’t be participating in adult matters.
The Neocons (jews) are out to get you! Oh, My!
I think it would be best if you pursued help and satisfaction with your issues with folks that care about you, rather than spouting off to strangers and becoming the Blog clown.
George Bush is out to get you! Oh, my!
You can get attention without making people dislike you sweetie.
I love your gay affectation, oh, my!
Now look, if you can put together something halfway rational without trying lamely to insult me in response, I’ll be happy to continue exchanging viewpoints with you in a productive manner. If not, I think it would be in your best interests for me to dismiss your comemnts going forward and not play into your drama.
Dismiss? You can’t control yourself, dumbshit. You’re paranoid. Everyone is out to get you. Plus, I don’t think there are too many people here who really want to read your crazy diatribes. I guess you can rip someone else’s blog off again and post it as your own writings. Or, maybe you can invent another sockpuppet and you can answer each others posts.
This isn’t a blog it’s some personal fued with nothing of any value past about half way down. HEY YOU TWO >> GET A ROOM OR A DIVORCE !!! Whatever works for you… neither of you are saying anything other than slamming each other because you do not agree. GET OVER IT !! THIS IS AMERICA !!! Add some actual value and make it worth reading or just go watch tv because your bickering is as entertaning and enlightening as HeeHaw !!!
On the other hand, since we are all waiting for a bloody miracle here and Easter Sunday is approaching, maybe she’ll rise from the dead. But until then, the only thing that could possibly help matters along would be to hold a pillow over her head for a few minutes or to more than deeply sedate her. While admittedly cruel, it’s far better than starving her to death. In retrospect, that ‘diet’ of hers; i.e., eating whatever you want as long as you have “two fingers for dessert,” the undeniable cause of her problems, seems to have not been such a good idea. A lesson well learned, albeit a bit late, for the “soon to be departed.”
Cindy, Living wills and DNR’s have been around a lot longer than fifteen years. My mother had one and my son had one. My son made his out in 1988 and my mother long before that. My son passed on with the help of a hospice in his own room with me at his side. Please get your information right before you start telling the world how smart you think you are.
From the moment that Terri dies the suffering will really begin. I pray that you are never in the situation that you must decide if your loved one is ready to pass on. Believe me Cindy, it is no walk in the park.
I just can’t believe this. I don’t understand it, and I can’t believe this. Who here has gone a full day…24 hrs. Without food or water? Anyone?? Hands up please…okay, none of us. But I’ve gone for a while…12 hrs, max. Without food, and lots and lots of water…I get very hungry…
How can we say that she doesn’t?? Hell…lets ask those kids on the TV, who everyone wants to send money to, but no one does…Hey? Does it hurt to know you’re starving to death??
You two up there are arguing w/each other, while this poor girls tongue and eyes are BLEEDING. Yeah. That’s good. Perfect American society.
Someone get the smaller picture. Everyone here is looking for a bigger picture…do what you have to do. Make a living will. Don’t let this happen again. But who’s actually looked at her?
The courts are looking out for her…they’re doing what’s best for her…yeah, don’t let them do what’s best for me then…especially if what’s best is allowing you to have no chance…
She’s had chance’s?? Give her another…that’s what all of us would want, right?? One more chance..please?? One more try…I’ll do it right this time. Who said that one as a kid?? And you don’t hear her saying that, but her parents do. They can see it in her face, even if it wasn’t there…they could see it. Because it’s who she was…to them. She’s they’re child. They’re baby. They spent more time w/her than anyone…and they can see it.
It’s a sad day in America when this is what we argue about. Whether or not it’s right to take this completely helpless life away, without giving it the chance to prove it wants to live.
So you want my opinion. This is all BS. I don’t care how old you are…you’re parents will always love you, and be there, and try to help you out. Who can’t understand that. THEY gave her life. THEY gave her dreams. THEY gave her everything. And now he takes it away. Yeah…lifes not fair…but this…
This is sick.
EdnaM
We have thousands of starving people that no on cares about in Sudan. But our focus is on a brain-dead woman in Florida whose husband states would not want to live this way. We have all this passionate energy in “her” favor here. Why am I sickened by all of this? Why can’t this be a peaceful end, and why aren’t you directing your energy where it belongs?
Colette
Oh please, just let “Terri the toad” die. She is starting to bore me already! After all, she technically died 12 years ago. Screw her! And why not??? Her husband Michael shows up at the Hospice at least two, usually three time a week and, in the guise of excercising his conjugal rights, bangs her like a screen door in a hurricane. Give me a break already!!! Let’s put an end to the insanity before he finally knocks her up and it’s a whole ‘nother story!
the tone of this blog’s Terri Schiavo debate is intense and honestly hurts my heart. it would be great to have moderate, intelligent discussion injected more often than highly-biased emotional opinion and personal attacks, but i suppose that’s the nature of extremism, from both ends of the spectrum.
my own belief is that a person whose brain functions have long-since ceased is nothing more than a living body, and that loved ones who seek to sustain life at that point are succumbing to their own personal and desperate need to hold on to the past rather than valuing and honoring the life and love they once shared together with the affected person.
my father and mother both stated clearly that they would not want to be on life support of any sort after a life or brain-destroying incident. when my fathered died of a heart attack, my mother was able to locate his living will, but unable to locate his DNR card, and the paramedics, without the card, attempted to resuscitate him for an hour in my parents’ home, in front of my distraught mother who knew this wasn’t what my father wanted, and then for another 3 hours at the hospital. he did not again show life signs.
i realize that my father’s situation was different from Terri Shiavo’s, but i also know the healing and forward movement with her life that my mother was able to have following my father’s death. they loved each other beautifully and simply. having to watch his desires dishonored despite clear and compelling directives to the contrary was horrific for my mother, and for his children and close friends who also knew his wishes. my mother now has several sets of her own DNR cards easily accessible in her home, her car, with our family and her close friends.
may the Schindlers find peace in Terri’s passing, may Michael have closure and new beginning, may Terri’s soul move on to a beautiful place, and may we all learn the lesson of direct death-planning conversation, and legal documentation so that our wishes are understood and honored.
As a nurse in a critical care setting I often find myself caring for patients like Terri. The sad part is not really knowing what her true wishes were. As a nurse I see many times that the Doctors tell the family there is no hope of recovery and then I watch that same patient get up and walk out of our hospital. Neurological medicine is the least understood of all the medical fields. It is the area of medicine where you see the most “Miracles”. Not because god intervened, but because the Doctors where wrong. Looking at Terri in the few videos they have allowed I would say she will never be a productive member of our communities again, But there is not a doctor on the earth that can truthfuly say they know she can not feel, understnad nor think at all. I have seen hundreds if not thousands of patients die in hospitals, I can only recall maybe 5 that ever said just let me go, most look at the staff and say help me Please help me I am not ready to die, most beg you to come up with their miracle cure. Even the ones that have the advanced directives, and living wills usually look at you and say no I am not ready to die please help me. Medicine helps when it can but all persons will one day die. And when the time comes for that to happen no doctor, nurse, husband nor preist can stop it.
In all the family issues it seems that one thing has been forgotten. I do not know of any state that has legalized murder, suicide, assisted suicide or euthanasia. Seems that a Doctor recently spent time in jail for this same thing. Seems to me if you allow this person to starve to death simply because she can not put a spoon to her mouth then you open a large can of worms in our future to any parent that decides their child is not exactly “right” in their mind. If a baby is born with down syndrome then that baby could be starved to death under these ruleings because it is not right in the mind, and can not feed itself.
Starvation is a terrible thing to do. We collect and send money all the time to the nations for their starving people. yet we will allow a judge to starve a person here.
I thought a judge could pass judgement on a person that had committed a crime. Sad thing is many of our states do not even in an event of a crime allow a judge to set a death penelty to the convicted yet now this one can do it to a completly inocent person because her husband that has a family and lots of money when she dies said it was her wish.
Seems odd to me when a person is just not 100 % there that she would loose her right to live. Next thing it could be placed to persons that are mute, retarded, simi alert, and it could in all reality be placed on any of us one day.
I have read these posts and been most impressed with the information and clarity that DS possesses. Julie, on the other hand is an idiot.
It’s all about respect for life – you either have it or you don’t. This same nation – which has allowed millions of unborn babies to be murdered while inside their mother’s womb – is now wrestling with the “quality of life” question for those of us outside the womb. “When is the quality of one’s life so poor that we should just go ahead and snuff them out?” It’s twisted and warped and so depraved that you have to be a spiritual blind man to miss it: the same guys that want to end the death penalty for murderers support the death penalty for unborn babies. And these are the same people who would dismiss the life of Terri Shiavo. If the woman’s not in pain and has family that are more than willing to take care of her…why in the world starve her to death? It’s incomprehensible.
I feel sorry for the people who think that Michael Shiavo is right. There is so many questions that have been raised about his motives. You people need to remember that one day you or one of your loved ones could be in the same position as Terri. Do you honestly feel like you could kill that person? I had to watch my aunt die from starvation, not because she was being refused food and water, but because she had colon cancer and it hurt her more to eat than not to eat. It was one of the hardest things that I ever had to do, to watch her die and know that there was nothing that I or anyone else could do to stop it. If you are any type of parent at all, you will do anything and everything to protect your children, and would rather have them alive in whatever shape they are in as to not have them at all. I hope that there can be a miracle for Terri. If not, then at least her parents know that they did all they could do to save her and at least Terri will die knowing that she was loved by people who were willing to fight for her, not waiting on her to die so they could get on with their life. Heaven help Michael Shiavo when his time comes to die, someone may decide to pull the plug on him.
Oh, look–Dumb Shit has a Bunker Buddy–DCS! Shouldn’t you boys be getting ready to disrupt sunrise Easter services? Can’t have any of those horrible Christians practicing their faith, can you.
The Schindlers are arguing with the wrong entity. Their argument lies not with the courts or Terri’s husband Michael. Their argument lies with God. They are playing a tug of war with the very God they claim to be followers of. They need a dose of faith and a little humility before God. And one last point.
Any government that is granted the power to step in and interfere with a personal family matter that has been decided by the courts, will be granted the power to interfere and pull the plug at the same time it is granted the power to restore her feeding tubes.
It is a counterfeit love that is contingent upon authority punishment or reward. In a nutshell, God had to kill Himself to appease Himself so that He would not have to roast us, His beloved creations, in HELL forever. He loves us more than we can ever comprehend, but if we don’t return His affections, He will make us regret it for eternity. Now that is AMAZING GRACE
This is my first experience with a “blog” and have been most impressed with the eloquence in which MOST people have expressed their OPINION. On the other hand, the immature attitudes, name calling, and juvenile behaviors that have been displayed have served as entertainment as opposed to appreciation of their viewpoint. I have to admit I spent well over two hours reading the BS comments made by the relative few. As for the rest of you no matter what your opinion is of this case… more power to you, and thanks for the info. I’m gonna have to pop in occasionally just to watch the drama that unfolds. I feel so much better about myself after reading others ridiculous, but entertaining, comments. LMAO Happy Easter to all from an atheist who is a registered democrat YET votes across party lines. I support my president, my govt., but not the christian fundamentalists trying to oust the “non believers”. As for Terri, her parents, and her dickhead husband… , God help them all. (If there is one.)
Any government that is granted the power to step in and interfere with a personal family matter that has been decided by the courts, will be granted the power to interfere and pull the plug at the same time it is granted the power to restore her feeding tubes.
Huh? Where did you think Greer got his power to order the tube removed? You rail against one entitiy using a gov. power but not a different entitiy using a gov. power.