Cerran

Noone can answer a simple yes or no question and I'm the master of spin? Finally! Someone answers the question, thank you Butero.

If I could do so without changing the tides, yes.

You're still beating around the bush here. I asked a simple yes or no question. It was hypothetical in nature, but it should be something you should be able to answer. It's not moot, and it does go to the heart of the issue so, Yes or no? To my understanding he tried every know therapy for more than 5 years before giving up, including experimental brain treatment in California. When this whole ordeal with the lawsuit was all said and done there was essentially no money left. But to answer your question, if his wife had been allowed to die and then he had taken the money after what he promised, that would have been wrong.

The question was: If there were clear instructions from Terri for no support measures in Terri's case would you support her being disconnected from the feeding tube? Yes or No?

I will not start a tangent on Iraq here Ovedya and give someone an excuse to close the thread. I am however going ask that people here be honest and answer the question I fairly asked.

I don't have to accuse him on that one. The facts stand on their own, it IS an illegal and immoral war. Unlike the Schaivo case where there was no preponderance of evidence to support the accusations, in the case of the Iraq war, there is a lot of evidence. I am judging Bush by the fruits of his works, or the lack thereof, but then lets stay on topic. If the question is pointless then no harm should come from answering it. Are you going to answer the question I asked or just sidestep it exactly like a politician?? It's a fair question.

I still haven't had anyone answer this question: If there were clear instructions from Terri for no support measures in Terri's case would you support her being disconnected from the feeding tube? Yes or No?

How? She would never be able to eat on her own, would have never been able to get better, and there was no hope of recovery. At what point do you suggest that letting the person die with some dignity? Especially when that is what she wanted in the first place. It shocks me that people here have so much compassion for a woman who was in such a state and so little for thousands of Iraqis killed in an immoral war. Talk about a double standard.

Against ---- O'Connor - Reagan Rehnquist - Reagan Scalia - Reagan Thomas - Bush For ---- Ginsburg - Clinton Breyer - Clinton Stevens - Ford Kennedy - Reagan Souter - Bush Everyone knows Clinton was a crook and a socialist, but call it like it is, Republican appointees also voted for this. Just goes to show you can trust neither Republicans or Democrats. The republic is dead and the Constitution is a dead piece of paper at this point.

It isn't the role of the court to make these decisions at all. It is the person's legal guardian's decision in the case the person cannot consent themselves. Which is what happened. Since the court was asked by Terri's parents to decide (which never should have happened since they were not her legal guardians) , they ended up unhappy with the result and tried to bully the court into changing their decision. Michael Schiavo

So at the heart of the matter of individual rights you believe at some point someone else's wishes trumps those of the patient. Even if you object on moral grounds it is a very dangerous road to start down. Look at it from the perspective of legal rights, who had the right to determine what was best for Terri and what her wishes were? At some point her parents were no longer her legal guardians and her husband was. So in essence the court made the right choice. They stood up for individual rights, saying the court or the state has no right to dictate the terms of what a persons wishes are. Whether the court had the right information is irrelavant, because based on the evidence presented to them the court ruled in favor of individual rights.

That's not what I asked. I asked if you personally would have a problem pulling the feeding tube even if instructions were clear that she wanted it pulled.

Ovedya if there had been clear instructions written down from Terri Shaivo on what her wishes were, would you then have objected to them pulling the feeding tube on moral grounds? I'm just curious as to the basis of the stance you are taking.

You're making the jump from no proof of an eating disorder to "She didn't have one" Ovedya. The same fallacy applies to the abuse allegations. You're contending that the abuse was covered up by healing over time yet the type of injuries that would cause the severe brain damage that put Terri in that state would likely still be evident 10 years later. I broke my arm 13 years ago, recently had an x-ray for a wrist injury and the doctor commented on the evidence of a previous fracture in my arm. Just because it happened 10 years ago doesn't mean there would be no evidence. Is it possible there would be no evidence? Yes. Is it likely? No. I've seen a lot of sites say this but yet to see anyone post the original admitting report. Do you have a link?

I'd like to see the religous leaders who basically called for Michael Shiavo's head to step forward and apologize. However since we live in the age of no accountability that isn't going to happen. I don't condone Michael Shiavo's adultury but it's now very obvious that he and his medical experts were right. And you're right Charlie, why so many Christians jumped on the bandwagon against Judge Greer is beyond me. The man did his job and didn't do what so many bad judges have done before, legislate from the bench. The irony is I constantly hear from Christians about "activist judges".

Actually it's an legitimate news story. Many news agencies are reporting on it but for some reason the majors - CNN, FOX, NBC ect don't seem to be picking it up.

LARGO, Florida (AP) -- An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused. But what caused her collapse 15 years earlier remained a mystery. The autopsy and post-mortem investigation found no proof that she had an eating disorder, as was suspected at the time, Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin said. Autopsy results on the 41-year-old brain-damaged woman were made public Wednesday, more than two months after her death March 31 ended a right-to-die battle between her husband and parents that engulfed the courts, Congress and the White House and divided the country. She died from dehydration, Thogmartin said. He said she did not appear to have suffered a heart attack and there was no evidence that she was given harmful drugs or other substances prior to her death. He said that after her feeding tube was removed, she would not have been able to eat or drink if she had been given food by mouth, as her parents' requested. "Removal of her feeding tube would have resulted in her death whether she was fed or hydrated by mouth or not," Thogmartin told reporters. He also said she was blind, because the "vision centers of her brain were dead," and that her brain was about half of its expected size when she died 13 days following the feeding tube's removal. Michael Schiavo said his wife never would have wanted to be kept alive in what court-appointed doctors concluded was a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. The Schindlers, however, doubted she had any such end-of-life wishes and disputed that she was in a vegetative state. The medical examiner's conclusions countered a videotape released by the Schindlers of Terri Schiavo in her hospice bed. The video showed Schiavo appearing to turn toward her mother's voice and smile, moaning and laughing. Her head moved up and down and she seemed to follow the progress of a brightly colored Mickey Mouse balloon. They believed her condition could improve with therapy. However, doctors said her reactions were automatic responses and not evidence of thought or consciousness, and Thogmartin's report went farther. "The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," he said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons." Thogmartin said the autopsy report was based on 274 external and internal body images, and an exhaustive review of Terri Schiavo's medical records, police reports and social services agency records. He said hospital records of her 1990 collapse showed she had a diminished potassium level in her blood. But he said that did not prove she had an eating disorder, because the emergency treatment she received at the time could have affected the potassium level. Testimony in a 1992 civil trial indicated that she probably was suffering from an eating disorder that led to a severe chemical imbalance. Over the years, the Schindlers had sought independent investigation of their daughter's condition and what caused it. Abuse complaints to state social workers were ruled unfounded and the Pinellas state attorney's office did not turn up evidence of abuse. Calls seeking comments Wednesday from the Schindlers and Michael Schiavo's attorney, George Felos, were not immediately returned. Speaking before the report was issued, Felos, said the Schindlers continue to engage in a "smear campaign against Michael to deflect the real issues in the case, which were Terri's wishes and her medical condition." During the seven-year legal battle, federal and state courts repeatedly rejected extraordinary attempts at intervention by Florida lawmakers, Gov. Jeb Bush, Congress and President Bush on behalf of her parents. Supporters of the Schindlers harshly criticized the courts. Many religious groups, including the Roman Catholic Church, said the removal of sustenance violated fundamental religious tenets. About 40 judges in six courts were involved in the case at one point or another. Six times, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to intervene. As Schiavo's life ebbed away following the final removal of her feeding tube, Congress rushed through a bill to allow the federal courts to take up the case, and President Bush signed it March 21, but federal courts refused to step in.

Perhaps the point you should also be making here Charlie is who gave him the chemical weapons and production capacity in the first place. Saddam did not make those on his own.

That's a great idea if it were about deposing dictators of brutal regimes, but it's obviously not. If the Bush administration was so keen on toppling brutal regimes why has he done nothing about Sudan, China, Pakistan, North Korea? Not to mention it is not the job of the US government to topple other governments through military force. We are to lead by example to show them why a free society benefits everyone. Unfortunately most Americans and our leaders seem to have forgotten this, instead they now want us to force our ideals on others, whether the people in the other country wants them or not. Now the question to you is, what benefit if any has the American public seen from the Iraq war? Has it made us safer? Has it made us richer? Has it improved our economy? Has it improved our trade? Has it made other countries view us favorably? In fact name one benefit the American people have seen from this whole debacle. I constantly hear from Christians, "you can't make a omlette without breaking a few eggs". Well I've yet to see the omlette materialize, in fact I'm about 99.99% sure it never will. Every day I turn on the TV to look at Vietnam Part II. You'd think by now we would have learned from past mistakes.

Million Dollar "Justice".

Thank increasing trade regulations, lack of real free trade and a Fiat money system for this. The Federal government is crushing the ingenuity and productivity of American companies slowly but surely.

The entire article has one overlying flaw Mobile: If we believe God is truly in control, then contraception or no contraception a baby will be born if he wills it. To assume otherwise denies the power and divinity of God.

He went back over to Iraq since he needed the money. His father has Alzheimers and his Mom is finishing her college degree since his father can no longer work. Couple that with a mortgage to pay and a wife and child to support and he needed the high pay that working over in Iraq offered. He's doing well last I heard from him and is almost ready to come home. He told me he can't tell me where he's working at because of security reasons. I've been mowing his lawn for him while he's been gone but hopefully he'll be back soon. I do know he checks the boards when he can but I'm not sure he's allowed to post because of security reasons.

Before you start spouting all self righteous it might behoove you to know Steff is currently in Iraq working on Gas Turbines that power most of Iraq's current infrastructure. He's been there for about a month and a half now putting his money where his mouth is. I'm his next door neighbor and I can tell you this, you'd be hard pressed to find a more dedicated family man and patriot anywhere. The man is more generous than anyone I know, and stands up for his beliefs whether he get ostracized for them or not. The statement you used above about WMD being shipped out of Iraq has no basis in fact, and was hand fed by the current administration with no hard evidence. Given the current administration's record I'm inclined to believe they are lying.

Snow, check out www.norfed.org . They have a negotiable silver coin and it's relatively cheap. You can get 10 ounces of silver and silver certificates for ~$107.