What I'm Seeing about the Schiavo case

[God Conquers]

So no one who can't swallow should be allowed to live?

Babies can't spew up without help... should they choke to death?

Should we allow people wheelchairs because they can't walk "naturally"?

Food and water are the essentials of life. If she was hooked up to a respirator or 24hr dialisis I'd be singing a different tune. But starving someone? Come on... if it takes a week to die after removing it it's not right.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='God Conquers' date='Mar 24 2005, 11:42 AM'] So no one who can't swallow should be allowed to live?

Babies can't spew up without help... should they choke to death?

Should we allow people wheelchairs because they can't walk "naturally"?

Food and water are the essentials of life. If she was hooked up to a respirator or 24hr dialisis I'd be singing a different tune. But starving someone? Come on... if it takes a week to die after removing it it's not right. [/quote]
A woman who has said 'don't let me live that way', has no cognitive function, and cannot take food in a natural manner should be allowed to die as she wished instead of being kept artifically alive. The fact that she will have no knowledge of her hunger or thirst first because she can't recognize it as such and second because she is heavily medicated should remove any charge of cruelty.

Frankly, I have to wonder what babies you've been around, because I've been puked on many a time without offering assistance of any kind.

Why is it "not right", just so I can respond properly.

[StPiusVPrayForUs]

Am I the only one who sees the irony of left wingers trying to stop world hunger, yet they can't step up for an innocent woman who is about to starve to death?

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='StPiusVPrayForUs' date='Mar 26 2005, 04:54 PM'] Am I the only one who sees the irony of left wingers trying to stop world hunger, yet they can't step up for an innocent woman who is about to starve to death? [/quote]
It's hard to see irony that isn't there.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Mar 28 2005, 03:21 PM'] It's hard to see irony that isn't there. [/quote]
word

[Dreamweaver]

Ok, what is taking in food "in a natural manner?" When I worked at a nursing home, some people had different diets. There would be soft or pureed foods for people who had difficulties chewing. There were also thicker drinks for people who had difficulty swallowing (often as a result of a stroke).

Would getting your hydration from thickened drinks be considered "unnatural"? I bet Terri Schaivo could consume food and drink that has been thickened and pureed. She can swallow her saliva. Its just that she's never gotten any tests or therapy to even diagnose that she's in a "persistent vegetative state".

[MC Just]

[quote name='StPiusVPrayForUs' date='Mar 26 2005, 04:54 PM'] Am I the only one who sees the irony of left wingers trying to stop world hunger, yet they can't step up for an innocent woman who is about to starve to death? [/quote]
Left Wingers dont really care about world hunger. They used too, now all that concerns them is ridding the world of Catholicism.

[Donna]

[color=red][b]REALITY CHECK:[/b][/color]


[color=green]I was hungry - and you did not give me to eat.
I was thirsty - and you did not give me to drink.

...Therefore, go away from me, you accursed, into the fire...

Lord, when did we see thee hungry and not feed thee? Thirsty and did not give thee to drink?

Amen, amen, I say to you, that as you did it to the least of these, my brethren, you did it to me. [/color]

[Donna]

[b]The substance remains the same whatever stage it is in -Aquinas[/b].


First, in light of Catholicism it matters not what her wishes were as regards food and water. If she were to refuse food and water (there may be exceptions to this...but I don't think so) then it's suicide instead of murder. The fifth Commandment forbids both, and a civil society should as well.

Even secular society's health professionals treat it as an illness if someone starves themselves.

Second,

[b][QUOTE][/b]A woman who has said 'don't let me live that way', has no cognitive function, and cannot take food in a natural manner should be allowed to die as she wished instead of being kept artifically alive. The fact that she will have no knowledge of her hunger or thirst first because she can't recognize it as such and second because she is heavily medicated should remove any charge of cruelty[b].[QUOTE][/b]


Which is it? No knowledge of hunger or thirst, or the morphine "needed" which has been given Terri?


Thirdly,

The substance remains the same whatever stage it is in (Aquinas). One cannot (speaking of the preborn) "become" human at some point, they were already.

So vice versa: [color=red]one cannot "unbecome" a human being.[/color]

In [i]Ioata Unum[/i], Roman Amerio author discusses an Italian law re: abortion (this was written in 1996): "While recognizing the foetus as a subject having rights, the Constitutional Court holds that it is not a person because it is [b]not at present conscious, or exercising a will,[/b] and the court therby [b]identifies the existence of a person with the present exercise of personal activities. This is a fallacy: at that rate comatose or sleeping people would not be persons, but they are universally recognized as such.[/b]

"...[b]A man remains a man even when he is not exercising certain human activities[/b], just as a doctor remains a doctor when not acting as such, for example when he is asleep...

"17th century casuists...were able to hold that abortion could be legitimate, and in some cases even a duty, because the natural science of that time said that the foetus received the rational form, that made it human, only in its third month."

(and so, I guess the logic applied is, the shrinking of the Alzheimer brain or absence of cortex is like the fetus' development in reverse. The comatose or brain dead used to be a person, but are no longer? What are they, then, an anti-person?)


"[These theories} contain a hidden denial of the essence of things, and also the vice of subjectionism. The infant [foetus in the womb] is alleged to have no essential nature unless it is accepted , that is, given a nature by a subjective act of will on the part of the parents, when in fact the reverse is true;
the fact of its acceptance is called forth by the ontological worth of the already existing infant. Since the baby exists, it has the right to be wanted as an existing thing, and its right to be wanted is rooted not in the fact of being wanted but in the fact of simply being there. This mistaken anthropology is derived from Marxism, and, like it, makes the person a relation. The human person certainly is in a relation with things and other persons, but it is not itself a relation: it is constituted as a being before (and after, if it loses exercising of the will, consciousness, we wonders?) entering into relations that conform with its nature."


- [i]taken from "Ioata Unum", Romano Amerio, pp 417-22.[/i]


Forthly: What is a misogynist?

A little boy pretending to be a trad.

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='Dreamweaver' date='Mar 28 2005, 11:19 PM'] Its just that she's never gotten any tests or therapy to even diagnose that she's in a "persistent vegetative state". [/quote]
So the 4 or more nuerologist that saw her and did numerous tests on her did not know how to do their jobs? CAT scans show that her cerebral cortex is a puddle of spinal fluid. One thing is to say that it was wrong for her to be killed. I'm not a big Michael Shiavo fan. But to deny she was a vegetable basicly says you know more than all the doctors that saw her, and frankly I doubt that. She wasn't comming back no matter what. But to have her starve to death, is a completely different matter. I dont agree with.

Edited March 31, 2005 by Melchisedec

[aloha918]

it sickens me how ill our country looks at suffering.......

[megrc]

She has had right to life, but it's been 15 years and nothing has gotten better with her, shouldn't her soul be alowed to be in peace. I don't agree with the way this whole thing has happened, but after 15 years and no hope of any kind of recovery, I think her husband had every right to make his request.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='Donna' date='Mar 31 2005, 03:20 AM'] First, in light of Catholicism it matters not what her wishes were as regards food and water. If she were to refuse food and water (there may be exceptions to this...but I don't think so) then it's suicide instead of murder. The fifth Commandment forbids both, and a civil society should as well.

Even secular society's health professionals treat it as an illness if someone starves themselves.

[/quote]
The fifth commandment also forbids the death penalty, war and killing in self defense. That doesn't matter to most.

[QUOTE]Second,

[b][QUOTE][/b]A woman who has said 'don't let me live that way', has no cognitive function, and cannot take food in a natural manner should be allowed to die as she wished instead of being kept artifically alive. The fact that she will have no knowledge of her hunger or thirst first because she can't recognize it as such and second because she is heavily medicated should remove any charge of cruelty[b].[QUOTE][/b]

Which is it? No knowledge of hunger or thirst, or the morphine "needed" which has been given Terri? [/QUOTE]

Morphine is given as standard practice. She would have no knowledge first because of one and second because of the other.

[QUOTE]Forthly: What is a misogynist?

A little boy pretending to be a trad.[/QUOTE]

What? And what does this have to do with anything?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='megrc' date='Mar 31 2005, 04:45 PM'] She has had right to life, but it's been 15 years and nothing has gotten better with her, shouldn't her soul be alowed to be in peace. I don't agree with the way this whole thing has happened, but after 15 years and no hope of any kind of recovery, I think her husband had every right to make his request. [/quote]
So you think length of time should decide its ok to murder someone?

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Mar 31 2005, 03:54 PM'] So you think length of time should decide its ok to murder someone? [/quote]
I think they are saying that she was basicly dead already, and that releasing her soul was humane.