Terri Schiavo's feeding tube removed.

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

Don't be too sure. Wills can work both ways. It might make it easier to put someone to sleep, but what about the people who write a will stating that they want to be kept artificially alive, Terri Schiavo-style, indefinetly? Does the hospital have to waste millions of dollars on those?

As long as the patient pays for it all, who cares. But if they're wasting other peoples money, screw that.

 

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

And even if the will from person x says that he/she wants to die in the event of braindeath, I suspect people will still try to make the will void or to override it in some other way. "Ah, she was probably just depressed when she wrote it, surely that can't have been what she wanted. I knew her, she wouldn't want that! Overrule that will!"

 

See my point?

But it's in writing, they can't overrule it. Just like a will of the estate, someone who got passed up for the estate can't just say "oh they were angry at me when they wrote that because I urinated on the cake" or whatever. So no.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

But it's in writing, they can't overrule it. Just like a will of the estate, someone who got passed up for the estate can't just say "oh they were angry at me when they wrote that because I urinated on the cake" or whatever. So no.

Ah, OK. I like your idea of using the patient's money, too.

 

But "Magic: The Gathering" is "M:TG", not "MT:G":D. Neat card, though:D.

[edlib]

Living wills can be contested. While it's unlikely that the ruling would ever go against the patient's wishes, the case could get tied up in the court system for years, leaving the patient in limbo the whole time, just like in this case.

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by edlib

Living wills can be contested. While it's unlikely that the ruling would ever go against the patient's wishes, the case could get tied up in the court system for years, leaving the patient in limbo the whole time, just like in this case.

It can be contested, just like a will of the estate, but it will never be overturned, just like a will of the estate. At least there's no record of any will ever being overturned.

[edlib]

True, that. But it doesn't mean that people won't still try. Now more than ever, I think.

 

I also forsee the very real possibility of legislation being introduced in the next couple of years that will try to override patient's wishes in cases like this.

 

Expect to see, in the very near future, proposed bills that make removal of feeding tubes illegal no matter what a living will might say.

[El Sitherino]

Sadly, I can see that happening.

[toms]

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

It explains God's viewpoint on euthanasia, suicide, murder.. etc. Of course, you'll likley scrub it off as a biased, unreasonable, and irrational source.

 

Kind of. Surely it is verry arrogant to try and "explain god's viewpoint"!?!?

 

If there is a god then i'm pretty sure we don't understand his viewpoint. And when it is an interpretation of modern issues by modern men based on a heavily edited, translated ancient version of a biography of gods messenger then i think it is even less likely to be any closer to knowing god's mind.

 

18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”

As usual with the bible that is readable a number of ways. First it says only those who believe in jesus get to go to heaven (even if they are good and the believers are evil).

Then at 20 it says that whoever people who do evil don't come into the light. And at 21 says whoever "comes into the light" is acting through gods will. SO if soeone does something good they are doing it through god? but they still don't get to heaven?

 

---------

 

I don't think precedent should matter in these sorts of cases, as each one is so unique. If the family and doctors can't sort it out then the courst is the right place to settle it. However there should be a way that the courts can sort it out in less than 15 YEARS!

 

With the comments of that senator guy about judges "flouting the will of congress" or something it did sound like a threat to change the law yet further.

 

Though it sounds to me from opinion polls that the courts were just doing their jobs and it was congress who were flouting the will of the people.

[SkinWalker]

I think it's time we start electing politicians that put their right hands on bibles to uphold the Constitution and their right hands on the Constitution to uphold the bible.

 

Actually, that's obvious hyperbole, but the number of politicians that have their lips firmly planted on the butts religious conservatives for votes is appalling.

 

To quote the New York Times, “the idea of Congress convening a weekend session to push through a potentially precedent-setting law for one single individual, with little regard to the long-term consequences, is profoundly troubling. Political opportunism? No question about it.”

 

Tom DeLay had this to say, “One thing that God has brought to us is Terri Schiavo, to help elevate the visibility of what is going on in America..." and he's right. It's getting to be very obvious "what is going on in America." But I'm sure he and I aren't thinking the same things.

 

DeLay also said, “This is exactly the issue that is going on in America, of attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others.”

 

Damned skippy. DeLay and his ilk require attack, or they will begin the collapse of our great society. DeLay is the idiot admonished three times by the House Ethics Committee recently -so we really need to believe what he says about "values."

 

He's also the dumba** that said to the media a few days ago, "[t]he time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior." This was in regard to the decisions of the state judiciary of Florida who refused to give up their states' rights in favor of federal manipulation of votes and politics. And if the comment wasn't a "call to arms" for every fundamentalist nutter (i.e. Timothy McVeigh deceased, Paul Hill jailed, Donald Spitz at-large, etc.) to pick up a gun or bomb and attack judges they disagree with, then it'll certainly be mistaken for one.

 

DeLay is a frickin' sh*tbird.

 

But his boss is the worst. Bush has the gall to make a comment that "we must always err in the direction of life"? This from the man who, when governor of my fair state, executed more criminals than Saudi Arabia or any third-world dictated country? Criminals that were retarded and had lawyers that slept during their trials? Whether or not you agree with the death penalty or not (I do), you have to agree that it isn't "erring in the direction of life" to execute a convicted criminal that is mentally ill or had grossely incompetent counsel.

 

It's time to get the religion out of politics! For the sake of both religious and secular society. Secular, by the way, doesn't imply "atheist," it means that the sacred is kept out of the hands of government.

 

Keeping the sacred away from the government is of the greatest benefit to the religious portion of our society, yet they continue to not get it. This includes the whole 10-commandments monument at public buildings debate. The Christians (as well as other relgious people) should be the first to stand up and say that it is inappropriate for government to appropriate their symbols for their use. It's profane and blasphemous. Blasphemy is an act that deprives something sacred or holy of its sacred or holy character. Putting a 10 commandments idol in a secular building like a courthouse does just that by implying that the government (the secular) has control over the sacred.

 

Use your heads people.

[toms]

Originally posted by SkinWalker

To quote the New York Times, “the idea of Congress convening a weekend session to push through a potentially precedent-setting law for one single individual, with little regard to the long-term consequences, is profoundly troubling. Political opportunism? No question about it.”

 

Not only that, its dangerous. We've had examples in the UK (though not as blatant as this) of laws being rushed through based on public reaction to individual events. In every case the laws have turned out to have unforseen effects, be illegal, or have to be repealed/fine tuned to make them workable.

 

Its like burning all your magazines in a fit of anger because you happend to trip on one. You soon realise it was a bad idea, and that making a blanket judgement based on an idividual event is a bad idea. You have to count to ten and think through the consequences.

 

Originally posted by SkinWalker

DeLay also said, “This is exactly the issue that is going on in America, of attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others.”

 

Any idea whether he was talking about the New York Post article, the court ignoring congress, the schiavo decision or what?

 

As far as i can tell there aren't a lot of attacks against the conservative movement going on.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

DeLay also said, “This is exactly the issue that is going on in America, of attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others.”

Yeah, isn't it odd how those Peaceful Christian Republicans™ come under attack for no reason at all?

 

Maybe if they were campaigning against abortion, condemning abortionists and gays and Non-Christians to Hell, obstructing school education of science (namely evolution), and conducting other dubious business there'd be a reason for them to come under 88mm flak fire from the left, but since they're just sitting there twiddling thumbs...

[lukeiamyourdad]

I think they're actually getting shot with an 105mm since all of their arguments on the mentionned subjects fall down like infantry making a head-to-head attack against a huge howitzer barrage.

[kipperthefrog]

Guys! lookie what I found.

 

HERE are some examples of "persistint vegitive states"

 

-clicky-

[Dagobahn Eagle]

With no doubt:D .

 

http://topplebush.com/humor/schiavo.jpg

http://topplebush.com/humor/schiavo2.jpg

http://topplebush.com/humor/schiavo_protesters.jpg

http://topplebush.com/humor/taking_lives2.jpg:D