Neal Boortz on Terri Schiavo

[Ryan]

I don't usually agree with much of what he says, but this expresses my view to a tee.

http://boortz.com/nuze/

[bfp]

You don't starve someone to death. Not if they can feel pain. That's torture. We won't do that to criminals or pets, why do it to an innocent individual? And whoever says that it's a painless death, needs to be shot point blank.

By the way, Boortz doesn't recognize that she had the chance for rehabilitation, but Michael 'we tried all we could' Schiavo denied the chances repeatedly.

[bfp]

Also, I believe he forfeited his rights as 'husband' when he shacked up with another woman and had two kids. Instead of being by her side through this, HE'S grandstanding, and acting as a victim. Why doesn't anyone pay attention to the fact that she tried her hardest Friday to tell everyone she didn't want to die?

I've seen nothing regarding her emotions of having her tube pulled. I guess her feelings about the issue is irrelevant.

There are many individuals out there incapable of taking care of themselves. You don't kill them because they're a nuisance.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by bfp

You don't starve someone to death. Not if they can feel pain. That's torture. We won't do that to criminals or pets, why do it to an innocent individual? And whoever says that it's a painless death, needs to be shot point blank.

By the way, Boortz doesn't recognize that she had the chance for rehabilitation, but Michael 'we tried all we could' Schiavo denied the chances repeatedly.

I think we have seen two very different sets of facts. From what I have read, her cerebral cortex is completely functionless, so she has no perception of pain. Her brain stem is in tact, so she still has display some motor responses, but she has absolutely no awareness at all. I also heard a doctor who actually examined her state that her "smiles" and "verbal reactions" to people have nothing to do with her knowledge that they are even in her presence and that at this point, she has zero chance of recovery. Every doctor I have read or heard who has said otherwise was either representing her parents or some pro-life group.

I understand this is a gutwrenching issue for her family, but this thing has gone too far. I don't know of a single person who would want to be kept alive in this state, and evidence shows that she absolutely did not. But once again, we have the same old Republican clowns playing there same old tricks of expanding the federal arm for political posturing. You even see the right-wing media demonizing her husband with a bunch of hearsay and unproven facts. But the real crime in my opinion is that this is all political, it has nothing to with Terri Schiavo. She's become a political hostage for a bunch of hacks, and I think it's sick. Typical, but sick.

[thefncrow]

This expresses your view to a T? Is the article up now newer than when you posted?

Boortz is basically expressing my opinion to a T. She's gone, her wishes have been determined, and the parents are living in a dream world, while all but 5 of the Republicans that appeared last night and the 53 Democrats that voted no are spouting bullshit and grandstanding, not to mention destroying any notion of State's rights and Separation of Powers.

At this point, until you bother reading the Wolfson Report, I'm done with this. You're spewing the same untrue bullshit time and time again. I documented the 5 documents that will detail everything you need to know about this case in the other thread, and if you actually did any real research, then you'd know better than to do this.

Unless, of course, you've already read them, in which case you have no excuse for spouting blatant lies that you know are blatant lies.

EDIT: Last shot: You don't kill them because they're functionally dead, you let them remove their life support because they expressed a wish that they do not wish to be kept alive via artificial means with no chances of recovery. At this point, "intellectual dishonesty" is about the least harsh I can be. You should know better by now, because the facts are contrary to this opinion of yours.

Originally Posted by thefncrow

.... not to mention destroying any notion of State's rights....

obvioulsy editted out most of your comment but wanted to highlight this one....

Its incredibly important, imo.

Whether the courts in Florida made the right decision or the wrong decision it is theirs to make. The federal government stepping in to take it away IS offensive to the notion of state's rights.

Originally Posted by thefncrow

EDIT: Last shot: You don't kill them because they're functionally dead, you let them remove their life support because they expressed a wish that they do not wish to be kept alive via artificial means with no chances of recovery.

Also an important distinction that I think has been lost in the discussions on this topic.

[bfp]

I think we have seen two very different sets of facts. From what I have read, her cerebral cortex is completely functionless, so she has no perception of pain. Her brain stem is in tact, so she still has display some motor responses, but she has absolutely no awareness at all. I also heard a doctor who actually examined her state that her "smiles" and "verbal reactions" to people have nothing to do with her knowledge that they are even in her presence and that at this point, she has zero chance of recovery. Every doctor I have read or heard who has said otherwise was either representing her parents or some pro-life group.

I understand this is a gutwrenching issue for her family, but this thing has gone too far. I don't know of a single person who would want to be kept alive in this state, and evidence shows that she absolutely did not. But once again, we have the same old Republican clowns playing there same old tricks of expanding the federal arm for political posturing. You even see the right-wing media demonizing her husband with a bunch of hearsay and unproven facts. But the real crime in my opinion is that this is all political, it has nothing to with Terri Schiavo. She's become a political hostage for a bunch of hacks, and I think it's sick. Typical, but sick.

First off, it became a political issue mainly because the politicians that got involved were contacted by millions of citizens from around their area. That was the primary factor that forced them to take action. For example, Jeb Bush was one of the first politicians to bring her up being that it was a localized issue.

Also, Ryan, the so-called 'hear-say' you speak of, is actual fact. Attorneys on the side of the Schindlers are the ones who have been releasing all of this information. And you can't begin to imagine what someone would be thinking in their mind if they were in such a state. Maybe she likes hearing from her mother and father every day? Maybe she doesn't want to die.

Fncrow, how am I spouting lies? I gave you detailed information from a doctors report. The doctor that did extensive tests on Terri quite often and came back with these results:

Impression:

The patient is not in coma.

She is alert and responsive to her environment. She responds to specific people best.

She tries to please others by doing activities for which she gets verbal praise.

She responds negatively to poor tone of voice.

She responds to music.

She differentiates sounds from voices.

She differentiates specific people's voices from others.

She differentiates music from stray sound.

She attempts to verbalize.

She has voluntary control over multiple extremities.

She can swallow.

She is partially blind.

She is probably aphasic and has a degree of receptive aphasia.

She can feel pain.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by thefncrow

This expresses your view to a T? Is the article up now newer than when you posted?

Boortz is basically expressing my opinion to a T. She's gone, her wishes have been determined, and the parents are living in a dream world, while all but 5 of the Republicans that appeared last night and the 53 Democrats that voted no are spouting bullshit and grandstanding, not to mention destroying any notion of State's rights and Separation of Powers.

At this point, until you bother reading the Wolfson Report, I'm done with this. You're spewing the same untrue bullshit time and time again. I documented the 5 documents that will detail everything you need to know about this case in the other thread, and if you actually did any real research, then you'd know better than to do this.

Unless, of course, you've already read them, in which case you have no excuse for spouting blatant lies that you know are blatant lies.

EDIT: Last shot: You don't kill them because they're functionally dead, you let them remove their life support because they expressed a wish that they do not wish to be kept alive via artificial means with no chances of recovery. At this point, "intellectual dishonesty" is about the least harsh I can be. You should know better by now, because the facts are contrary to this opinion of yours.

Who are you addressing?

[molecule]

of all the important issues we face I would deem worthy of having an emergency sunday night congressional meeting about, this surely aint one of them. we agree there fo sho.

[bfp]

you let them remove their life support

She's not on LIFE SUPPORT.

She can swallow. Michael sought a court order in order to keep her from eating solids.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by bfp

She's not on LIFE SUPPORT.

She can swallow. Michael sought a court order in order to keep her from eating solids.

Her swallowing is a reflex. Can she live with the feeding tube? If not, then it is artificially keeping her alive.

[tricky]

Originally Posted by United States Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
- 10th Amendment

i definitly agree with you on this one Xian

Originally Posted by Ryan

Her swallowing is a reflex. Can she live with the feeding tube? If not, then it is artificially keeping her alive.

that's a fact question - and I thought the answer was "yes"

but, that's not really relevant as I understand things....

" kept alive via artificial means with no chances of recovery"

there's little doubt she's got no chance of recovery and apparently the court held that the feeding tube is artificial means... as such the question is, is there clear and convincing evidence that Terri wished not to be " kept alive via artificial means with no chances of recovery".... in short - did the court believe Husband's claim - they did.

Originally Posted by tricky

i definitly agree with you on this one Xian

sorry to do that to you

[bfp]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Her swallowing is a reflex. Can she live with the feeding tube? If not, then it is artificially keeping her alive.

Can 1-2 year old kids live on their own? All I'm saying is that it's a life, and I'm sympathetic to that. Should we then start starving people that can't take care of themselves? Alzheimer patients? Kids with other mental and health problems?

Perhaps we can just euthanize all of the handicapped.

Again, a comatose state, a deep coma, deserves the right to have the plug pulled, but this is different.