Great!…

Is blog\’s open to free speech?…

0b75f2a1cb61…

This was one time where I have to agree to disagree…

You started out long before you commented here with a premise, that Terri Schiavo had to die, and have simply piled confirmation upon confirmation from the mainstream media onto your viewpoint.

Look, I’m not the one telling people what they think. You can say I’m operating from a position of ignorance, but I know for a fact that you have no way of knowing what I do, or have thought, about this case. The mainstream media I read mostly supported her parents position, so don’t try and use the old “you bought into the MSM” meme on me.

You use sensationalist terms to try and move people, like “property” and “inconvenience”. But it’s really just trying to re-frame something else. . .his responsibility to resepct her wishes. All things weighed, I still think he did. I think her parents understandably didn’t want to let go of their daughter, and would have held the same position even if they’d known it was her wish that she be allowed to pass on.

And it doesn’t matter. It’s STILL not the government’s job to decide, no matter how many hard-hitting adjectives you use to describe the issue.

If I knew my wife’s wishes, and her parents decided they wanted to deny them to her, I’d refuse divorce too, until her wishes had been fulfilled. That’s what I think smalltowngirl.

I know that if my husband were to end up as a vegetable and I was told there was no chance for recovery so I decided to stop all treatment…..I would be shocked to have the federal government intervene in such a private and personal matter for my son and I.

Food and water is not treatment. Food and water is basic care.

Strange that you put your husband instead of yourself in the place of Terri Schiavo in your example. You could have put yourself there, but you chose not to. Perhaps it’s because you know deep down that you don’t want to starve and thirst to death, but it’s not so bad if someone else does.

*************

Several years ago, the doctors told my mom that her husband was vegetative and would not recover, and asked to put his living will in effect.
But within hours, my mom and a cousin found they had been double dosing him on Lasix and Phenargan, and his potassium was almost gone!
She got his heart specialists in another city on the phone, and they got things cleared up “toot sweet” – by the next day, he was conscious, alert, and very glad to be alive, indeed!
AND IMMEDIATELY RESCINDED THAT “LIVING WILL”!
They had three more wonderful years together. I was in their home very frequently, and he was delightful companionship. He was the one always the most ready and able to go somewhere, too!

I too noticed this lady felt that her husband starving to death would be a private matter for her and her son.

I suppose she would consider it equally private if she and her son had been the ones to toss her husband down the stairs, as well! Hard to believe these creatures are Americans.

If Fred is RIGHT, then why did the bill he helped push, support and vote for do so much to enable such as the DIMS why stiffling Conservative and Christian opposition to Dim Socialism?

It’s only one more INSTANCE of his personal Clinton ENABLING. Or did you not KNOW he CHAIRED the meaningless committee that “investigated” the CHINESE FUNDING to the Clinton Campaign of ‘96 – TO NO AVAIL FOR THE CAUSE OF AMERICAN JUSTICE!

No, all the appeals NEVER HEARD THE DETAILS OF THE CASE AGAIN – they only resolved that the lower court decisions were appropriate on TECHNICAL details – NOT ON THE DETAILS of the matters of the case.

NOBODY EVER AGAIN HEARD THE DETAILS of the suspicions that Michael was responsible for her injuries or thwarted basic medical diagnostic testing of her situation.

The most cursory perusal of the details of the case make THAT MUCH perfectly clear.

To contest otherwise is a blatant and disgusting perversion of the facts, from either a legal standpoint, or a journalistic standpoint.

#164On September 15th, 2007 at 10:12 pm, blogagog said:
Use ‘Flabbergastingly’ in a sentence

Flabbergastingly, some, himself included, call Fred Thompson the new Ronald Reagan.

Not so flabbergastingly, that idea just makes me barf!

Personally, I favor spousal primacy and feel that it should be the law. As I’ve said before and will this one last time, a primary objection to DeLay and First insinuating themselves where they didn’t belong was that their interference in settled litigation might have disturbed legal spousal primacy. I want it. I wrote it into my living will, the one where I specified that I wish no artificial means to sustain me, including a feeding tube, once my brain ceases to function and there is no reasonable hope of recovery. I also specified that if there is any question or dispute about that, my husband, my children, and my best friend, in that order, will be the ones to choose what will be done on my behalf. If any of them are sleezoids lookin’ to do me in for nefarious purposes, then I chose wrong, but it was my choice.