tonberry, stop forcing your beliefs on us. Also, before you go off and say we are doing the same thing, we are not, we are trying to show you that if you force your beliefs on us and we dont agree with them, we will attack them. I you just calmly stated them, you would be getting far fewer flames.

Also, you seem to be seriously generalising about abortion.

She cannot THINK properly, if at all. She cannot EAT OF HER OWN VOLITION.

For all intents and purposes (edited this. Hate it when I do that), she is dead.

Abortion 'is murder' depending on who you are. Everyone's views are different.

BTW--if a deer has the same value of human life, then I'm all for cannibalism.

Hah, the same person says abortion is murder and homosexuality is not a sin. I think you're the first person I've ever heard of that fits this description. 'grats.

First of all, STFU.

Second of all, I am not forcing anything on anyone. I am stating an opinion. I don't ****ing care if you agree or not. I am not Terry Schiavo, I am not her husband, I am not her parents, I am not a representative of the United States' government nor its judicial system.

Third of all, it is you who is assuming that just because I am stating that abortion is murder, which it is, that I am making a moral judgment.

And Tonberry, your "a plankton is as valuable as a human" crap is just that -- crap. Unless you seriously mourn the loss of millions of plankton every time a whale takes a gulp of water, that's just a farce.

@ freelancer.

then you haven't met the australian politicians that have brought up the abortion debate agian.

I'm not Australian either, mate.

I did not claim that I mourn the death of anything. Wolves hunt deer, deer kill grass. Death is a part of life. I do admit that I feel bad for the millions of flowers senselessly slaughtered because millions of teenage Johnny Hornys need a little sexual healing from their corresponding Jenny Don't-Put-Outs. Though I do often fail in doing so, I try to feel an honest appreciation for the lives that ended because I had to sit down to eat a meal or walk on the grass.

First of all--I'd be careful who you tell to STFU when your posts aren't driven by anything other than your own morals, which you ARE forcing onto other people.

Secondly--You ARE making a moral judgement. Whether or not you believe so, you are. Abortion equating murder is up to each and every individual, there is no logical fact stating that it is, or is not, murder.

it was more a joke that was refering to the annoying government we aussies have at the moment. (stupid Bush suck-up of a PM)

whoa boy. that point is a tad more hypocritcal coming from you. slightly moreso whithout the extra bit that I had. (your first paragraphs that is)

second paragraph. I totaly agree with.

(also, I'm amazed this thread has only managed to change subject to abortion. the one on the gary's mod forums somehow managed to get on to something about the cold war )

Master Tornberry, I understand what you are saying, but I think you are a bit confused. To murder someone implies that you are either killing someone illegally, or, more importantly, killing someone in a brutal way or inhumanely. Those who want to let her die want so because they truly believe that it is the humane thing to do. Regardless of whether you agree with it or not, you cant view it as an act of malicious intent. Both sides really and truly do want what is best for Terri... they just disagree on what exactly that is. I think this whole debate, not only on these forums but in general, would go a lot better if both sides realized this.

Also, please dont tell each other to "STFU." Anyone is allowed to post here if they wish, and it is not your places to decide who can and who cant.

You are right. As I've stated previously, I do tend to misuse the word murder, especially in that what it means to me is not what it means to anyone else (that is to say, what it actually means). Basically what I think is that as long as Terry Schiavo's stay in a hospital does not prevent others with more urgent needs from being treated and that, while there are some who feel that it would be alright to put her to rest, there are those (namely her parents--most importantly her parents) who want her alive (which she is), she should be allowed to remain so. If her parents can keep her in their home or can arrange for her to be privately cared for, then this should be allowed. Terry Schiavo did not state in a will that she would want to be "disconnected". If someone chokes and becomes unconscious, you don't have to get their permission to try to get them to breathe again.

But you see, in saying she should remain alive because others want her alive, you dehumanize her, and totally defeat the purpose. I can understand for religious reasons, and I can understand having her die another way, but they want to let her rest in peace because, well, would you want to live that way? Probably not. But you'd be okay with it if your parents wanted you to live a...well I call it a tortured, half-existence, but I can't really tell you for certain what it's like.

Point is--who gives a damn about her parents, or anyone else. This case is about her. Nobody else.

Terri Schiavo did get brought back by somebody when she "passed out" from heart failure. And guess what, it didn't work as well as they planned. She's messed up now. She shouldn't be alive right now. She's not self sustaining, and if you suggest that she does have feelings and such, then she probably HATES the way her life is right now. Put her away for good. She's not doing anything productive for society, and odds are she's not feeling anything anyway. She's just wasting doctors' time and money.

Like I said, the Bible toting republicans should just leave it up to God. Pull the plug, and if he miracles her *** out of her current stasis, then she was meant to live.

Isn't that what parents do to their kids anyways?

It can be dehumanizing if it would be based on something, for example, like if a religious-type political person wanted this. But I think her own parents have some responsibility for her life. Just like some parents choose to abort their children before they are born, and some choose to let them live. Bottom-line, her husband and the United States' judicial system did not give her life. If her parents aren't ready to forfeit it, well, that accounts for something, doesn't it?

That's called "taking your life out of God's hands." That arguement simply doesn't work.

And by your logic, we should have killed Christopher Reeve, too.

She's not a child anymore. If her parents get a divorce because her dad is violent or something, the courts can't order her dad to stay away from her mother AND her. She's not legally connected to dear old mom and dad anymore. She's legally connected to ol' Mikey. And Mikey says to pull the plug. It's his perogative, not mom and dad, and not Jeb.

In a blunt, crass way, Bill said what I was going to say.

Legally, no? Fine. That doesn't make her parents any less significant in/for her life.

It drives me nuts that people actually use that word here. I swear I have never heard or seen it in my life anywhere else! :p

You're absolutely correct. If you have never read Maddox's page on Reeve, I'll let you in on a little bit of info. If Reeve had not been prancing around on a purebread horse beating the bejesus out of it and making it jump over fences, that would have never happened to him. Bad luck, Chris. You messed up. Stop *****ing.

Little old Terri decided she was going to puke her guts out because she thought she was too fat. Bad news, Terri, it didn't work out like you wanted it to. How about next time you don't do stupid **** and you won't end up in a bed with a tube in your belly.

Had either of these people gotten into this trouble for a reason that was not the result of them doing something incredibly stupid, I would feel differently.

It would to me. For ****'s sakes, she's not a kid. She took responsibility for her actions. Not only that, but the ability to give/take her life does not lie in their hands just because they fathered/mothered her. That's a horrible reason for them to have the ability to put her through this...torture of sorts.

No, they all don't. Thanks for the old news.

Dj Yoshi, if your government made it legal to segregate and exterminate a group of people to whom you happened to belong, would that be enough to convince you that that's how it should be? I'm not saying this is the same type of situation, but laws aren't always necessarily correct or sound.

...

She became an adult. She was married. She didn't live, or depend on her parents. It has not the least thing to do with the law. More to do with common sense.

That doesnt make them any less her parents though.

Not saying it does. But if she can live her own life, cannot she die her own death?

No kidding. This has brought out the least generic sets of beliefs ever.

This debate is senseless. The woman is living in a state that medical science cannot reverse. No matter what your stand on the situation do you not take pitty on this woman? If sentient anymore, do you honestly think she looks forward to waking up in the morning? Having people poke and prod her to see if she'll react? Have the people she loves argue over whether or not she has to remain in this hellish state for as long as it takes for her life to end with or without the equipment?

To me, at this point she deserves to rest. 15 years in that state is an awfully long time, particularly if she's sentient. Anybody read Johnny Got His Gun? She reminds me DIRECTLY of that book. Those thoughts are almost certainly running through her head. She's worth no more to herself than a lump of flesh lying on a table being sustained by machines. She'll never again experience life the way that its meant to be. She'll never be able to walk outside, or hell, even enjoy the outside world. She'll never be able to properly express herself. Nobody will hear her. She'll live the rest of her life listening to people talk to her like an infant and touch her when maybe she doesn't want to be touched.

The thought of keeping her alive makes me sick.

Another thing, theres a very distinct difference between Christopher Reeves and Terri Schiavo. Reeves was merely paralized. He was capable of thinking, and CHOSE to continue living. The injuries he sustained could very well have killed him, but he decided to use his money to make sure he was still alive. Using hope and an extravogant amount of money to try to rehabilitate himself. Terri can't decide anything. Even if she has a decision made, nobody can hear her. It's like being a deaf mute in a room full of blind people. You can sign all you want but nobody will hear you.

I think the whole point I'm trying to get across is that both sides of the debate take pity on her... which is why they are fighting for their particular belief. This wouldnt be such a debate if people were apathetic about the situation.

but with pitty does there not come shame for making her live that way? If she's sentient or not is almost irrelevant. Our knowledge prevents us from reversing her condition. Science knows no way to make her well again. And I would think of that as a terminal condition regardless.

I think that if people agreed that it was hopeless for her to ever revert to her normal self, they might also agree that letting her die would be the best choice. But so far, I've not yet seen any proof that this is 100% certain. Some people are clinging to the hope that some day, she'll etheir recover on her own, or that we'll have the science and technology to do it for her. Hope is a powerful emotion.

The thing that gets to me is the pictures of her in her current state, where she is smiling. I do not think that she could be completely gone if she is still capable of expressing emotion. If she can be happy, does that mean that she can also feel fear? Fear of death even? If she can, then I think I would have to agree that it is inhumane to let her die in this manner.

Oh, I'm in favor of euthanizing her. If she is sentient, I don't think she should starve. Though I think any death would be merciful compared to this life she has now. I'd much rather see her put under quickly and painlessly.

From the New England Journal of Medicine

Persistant Vegetative State


Ok. By definition she cannot be PVS since it is proported that she can respond to external stimuli. Her 1996 CT Scan shows a nice chunk of her brain turned to liquid. Most of that area is responsible for motor control, and some cognitive abilities. The portions involving emotion are intact. Which is why she seems to show emotion.

I'm still convinced she is "terminally ill." She cannot live w/o out the aid of machines. Forever will she be strapped to that bed unless medical science is able to regenerate brain tissue. This could taked decades even centuries to develop. So if the parents are granted their desires. Their daughter has the very real chance of lying in that bed strapped to a machine for the rest of her life. I want you all to reread that last sentence. Being hooked up to machines until your natural death on the slightest of slim chances medical science will restore at least her motor skills. I couldn't do that to my child.

Apparently, she can since she reacts to her surroundings. Just because she can't represent it "normally" doesn't make it absent.

Brilliant. People with cerebral palsy usually can't feed themselves either, yet nobody claims they should be put down.


Let her situation be a lesson to all of you. MAKE A LIVING WILL... while you still can. You never know what kind of accidents you'll get into in life, and you better be sure they'll be handled properly.

The thing that really gets me is that the pictures can convince people that she's expressing emotion.

She isn't expressing emotion, she isn't 'happy'. She isn't capable of processing any thoughts. Her 'smiling' is the result of involuntary muscle spasms, like a fish wriggling for several hours after death.

Well, I can't really make a legal will right now. But I will say this. You all bear witness. Should, God forbid, something happen to me and I end up PVS, pull the plug. I'm dead (no pun intended) f'n serious.

So can insects. So can bacteria. So can grass.

Yeah, that's the way I meant it.