Terri Schiavo (the brain dead woman)

[ArmenianKid]

I don't understand why people have to suffer. Look at what they're doing to Dr. Kevorkian. He only wants to help people in their most desperate times. This f*cking country will allow doctors to use cancer and aids as a means of population control, but won't allow someone, who is suffering and is going to die a painful death, the right to end it in a painless way.

who the hell uses cancer and aids as popluation control?

[CatWoman]

Cat, when the tube is removed, Terry will die of dehydration weeks before she would have died of starvation. Of course, if euthanasia wasn't illegal, she could simply be given a dose of pottasium chloride that would stop her heart immediately.

Well she'll die of dehydration AND starvation... again, neithre of them are humane ways of killing someone.

[ArmoBarbi]

For the sake of the discussion (thread) :

Is there really a humane way of killing someone? Isn't killing inherently inhumane? If yes, then how it is done doesn't matter, because the act will always be inhumane anyway.

Of course, because we care about this woman as fellow human beings, we want her to suffer as little as possible. (This is what we really mean when we talk about a humane way to die/kill I believe)

Thus, to be able to decide whether or not to pull the plug we must conclude whether or not she suffers now. If she does, then she should die, because death would mean the end of suffering. (I think theists and atheists can both agree in this case) If she doesn't, then we can argue further based on other things.

Keep in mind that the woman is brain dead - If she is not suffering because she is not conscious of the suffering do we count it? (you know what I mean...)

Let me know if something is not clear to you.

[ArmenianKid]

thank you. she really isnt suffering becuase she dosnt feel anything. she is a shell that contains a soul, maybe her soul left along time ago.

[CatWoman]

For the sake of the discussion (thread) :

Is there really a humane way of killing someone? Isn't killing inherently inhumane? If yes, then how it is done doesn't matter, because the act will always be inhumane anyway.

Of course, because we care about this woman as fellow human beings, we want her to suffer as little as possible. (This is what we really mean when we talk about a humane way to die/kill I believe)

Thus, to be able to decide whether or not to pull the plug we must conclude whether or not she suffers now. If she does, then she should die, because death would mean the end of suffering. (I think theists and atheists can both agree in this case) If she doesn't, then we can argue further based on other things.

Keep in mind that the woman is brain dead - If she is not suffering because she is not conscious of the suffering do we count it? (you know what I mean...)

Let me know if something is not clear to you.

Yes, I believe euthanasia is humane, but removing the tube, waiting two-three weeks for a person to dies is NOT.

Did you read my post? Apparently the woman had a shot at recovery through rehab and therapy but the husband didn't want her to go through it!!! Did you read what her nurse had to say about her when she was first hospitalized? You guys don't see anything wrong here? wow, I'm seriously shocked.

[violette829]

who the hell uses cancer and aids as popluation control?

No one..it's better if you're kept in the dark about this subject. Enjoy

[Anonymouse]

How convenient that right during Monday, the one year marking point when America launched it's attack on Iraq, the government had to be taking care of important isses such as badgering baseball players for using steroids or whether Terri Schiavo's bong needs to be removed.

While protests and vigil's were held across the nation and the world, Congress was busy with these important things.

Some talking points

Point 1 The government has absolutely no business getting involved in this case as it is a private affair. It is the business of her husband, not the government. End of debate.

Point 2 The government does not care about the life of Terri Schiavo or the life of anyone else for that matter. This is simply a political ploy of the lowest kind.

[violette829]

How convenient that right during Monday, the one year marking point when America launched it's attack on Iraq, the government had to be taking care of important isses such as badgering baseball players for using steroids or whether Terri Schiavo's bong needs to be removed.

While protests and vigil's were held across the nation and the world, Congress was busy with these important things.

Some talking points

Point 1 The government has absolutely no business getting involved in this case as it is a private affair. It is the business of her husband, not the government. End of debate.

Point 2 The government does not care about the life of Terri Schiavo or the life of anyone else for that matter. This is simply a political ploy of the lowest kind.

I whole-heartedly agree.

[ArmenianKid]

How convenient that right during Monday, the one year marking point when America launched it's attack on Iraq, the government had to be taking care of important isses such as badgering baseball players for using steroids or whether Terri Schiavo's bong needs to be removed.

While protests and vigil's were held across the nation and the world, Congress was busy with these important things.

Some talking points

Point 1 The government has absolutely no business getting involved in this case as it is a private affair. It is the business of her husband, not the government. End of debate.

Point 2 The government does not care about the life of Terri Schiavo or the life of anyone else for that matter. This is simply a political ploy of the lowest kind.

its the 2 year mark.

and yes i agree.

[Anonymouse]

its the 2 year mark.

and yes i agree.

Yes, pardon me.