I warned you the rant mode was only suspended.
As I type this, the Democratic party of the United States of America is holding a floor debate in the House Of Representatives over whether they can kill a woman. And make no mistake… No matter which side of the debate you are on, she will live for years if they only feed her. This is not about “letting her die” this is about actively withholding food from a human being.
The Democrats want her to starve to death.
You can go thru the Wizbang archive for a long time and never see a word I wrote on Terri Schiavo. It was a sad case that frankly I wished would somehow magically and mercifully go away. So I did not “go looking for this fight.”
I broke my silence when the Democrats started playing politics with this because it might be related in some tangental way with abortion. Just look at the lengths they will go to kill this woman:
Senate Passes Bill to Help Schiavo
WASHINGTON — With the sparsest of attendance, the Senate unanimously passed on Sunday a bill to try to help brain-damaged patient Terri Schiavo (search) by pushing her case into a federal court for consideration. …
Earlier in the day, the House of Representatives met to vote on Schiavo’s fate but quickly recessed after it became clear that the bill would face congressional debate by opposing Democrats. The House was meeting at 9 p.m. EST to start debate, and House leaders said they hoped to get a vote on the matter as early as possible after midnight.
After three hours of House debate, leaders will call for a vote, but Democrats are expected to demand a recorded vote. The House will need at least 218 members present to take a roll call vote. Lawmakers have been trickling in from their districts to be there for the midnight hour. The House has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent, but no one is certain how many members from each side are expected to return.
So the Democrats are hoping that there are not enough Republicans to stop them from using procedural trickery to kill this woman. Why don’t the Democrats sponsor an alternative bill… Why not sponsor a bill where the highest ranking Dem official in the State of Florida will go give Schiavo a lethal injection? If you want to kill the woman then by all means let’s kill her… Don’t pussyfoot around wanting for her to starve to death!
I’m going to repeat myself… The Dems now will kill unborn children, the sick and the old… The only people they don’t want to die are murderers.
And make no mistake… This is all about abortion. They are afraid that if Terri lives people might think life is important or something.
]]>< 
Take a deep breath, Paul.
Hmmm.
I’m a fiscal conservative, not a social one. In most cases I’m pretty neutral on social issues. But this is a seriously strange case. I might be wrong, probably am wrong, but my understanding is that only one judge has been ruling on this case all along. That appeals have been made but rejected and so this entire case hasn’t been given any sort of real review and that judicial procedures have been used to kick the case back to the same judge each time.
This is absolutely wrong.
Whether you agree or disagree the simple fact remains that Terri Schaivo has a better chance of living if she were a convicted murderer. How can the Left be such advocates of the rights of convicted murderers and yet treat this as if staving this woman was the right thing to do? And these are the same people who were screaming about “torture”??
How on earth could the NYT run an article claiming that a death by starvation or thirst is actually “gentle”??? WTF? Starving to death or dying from thirst is NOT gentle.
This is just some strange episode of the Twilight Zone and I’ll wake up. Because right now all I can think of is the amount of evil the Left is willing to do to play politics.
I too wish this case had magically disappeared by now. I disagree with your argument on one key point, regardless of what should be done in respect to the feeding tube. I don’t think the Democrats are the only people playing politics. Both sides are playing partisan politics and are managing to worsen an already tragic issue.
If Republicans had made this about the absence of a living will I wouldn’t take issue with it. But, instead they have involved themselves in a case that has been decided in court numerous times and been twice turned down for consideration in federal court. Now new expert opinion is being used to refute older expert opinion. This is not a clear cut medical issue but I’m sure that the numerous courts have a clearer understanding than a emotional news story that has now become a pawn in partisan politics.
Dangerous legal precedent is occuring. Sounds heartless, I know. Frankly, these days I trust courts that have heard expert opinion for years on this case over politicians looking for leverage. Neither party is standing on the moral highground despite their claims.
State authority and medical authority are being both being completely disregarded. I think I’m getting repetitive. In simple terms I believe authority is being overextended and all sides are now doctor shopping, playing on emotions as they do so.
I would recommend that interested parties watch the live debate on C-SPAN now.
Schiavo has already started another family with his current live-in lover.
To me, this should be sufficient to remove his right to make any decision about Terri Schiavo. He had ample opportunity to divorce his wife and allow her family to handle to responsibilities of her care. Instead, he chose to shack up with another woman and produce off spring while his wife lay in a hospitial bed.
… No matter which side of the debate you are on, she will live for years if they only feed her. This is not about “letting her die” this is about actively withholding food from a human being.
Not to me. Seems to me (INSENSITIVITY ALERT) more like withholding water from a growing vegetable. I can’t get too worked up over this because the real Terry Schiavo passed away years ago. This debate is about wheather or not to keep the empty husk alive.
Schiavo has already started another family with his current live-in lover.
To me, this should be sufficient to remove his right to make any decision about Terri Schiavo. He had ample opportunity to divorce his wife and allow her family to handle to responsibilities of her care. Instead, he chose to shack up with another woman and produce off spring while his wife lay in a hospitial bed.
Life always goes on. You’re attributing some nefarious motives to the man. I think it’s a bit too much to expect him to sit by her bed, living like a penitent monk. If he had evil motives, he’d just let the parents take care of her as they’ve offered to.
Dangerous legal precedent is occuring.
Damn right. We go from bemoaning “judicial tyranny” to crafting a bill designed to drag the courts into this case.
There are valid arguments to both sides of this question. In general I’m a strong advocate of the right to die IF one is able to state one’s wishes clearly or left such wishes in writing. When neither of those is the case it becomes a case-by-case decision – there just is no one-size-fits-all.
I’ve read the text of both the Senate and House bills. Neither one saves Terri’s life. All they do is give her the same legal rights that convicted death row inmates have to a review of their case in federal court and to representation. Terri does not have representation – the attorneys in the case represent the husband and the parents – and no other court has reviewed the FACTS of the case – only procedural issues.
A review in federal court would include a review of the FACTS, meaning that this life or death decision would not be based on the opinion of only one judge. Any one person can make a mistake. When it’s a matter of life and death everyone deserves to have a second opinion.
“Not to me. Seems to me (INSENSITIVITY ALERT) more like withholding water from a growing vegetable. I can’t get too worked up over this because the real Terry Schiavo passed away years ago. This debate is about wheather or not to keep the empty husk alive.”
Just goes to show you what the debate is really about, it is about removing the personhood of people, so that they no longer have those rights we appreciate so well, ya kow the right to LIFE, Libertya nd the pursuit of happiness for starters.
We already think it is find to kill disabled babies in the womb, so why not start killing the disabled who are outside the womb. That is what is chilling about this whole debate, we are looking for ways to remove somebodies personhood, so we can essentially murder them. We give convicted criminals more due proccess rights than Terri Schiavo has had. Terri’s GAL for the tube removal hearing recomended against removal of the tube. During the fact finding portion of the trial, this was the only person that represented Terri’s interests, and she hasn’t had continuous representation since, the last GAL she had was appointed in 2003, because of the bill later struck down in Florida.
Michael Schiavo has another woman, and children with her, he should not be the one making these decisions.
What harm exactly would there be in Michael walking away, marrying his live in girlfriend and the mother of his children, and letting the Schindlers take home their daughter?
YOU STILL HAVE NO REAL KNOWLEDGE OF THIS SITUATION AND I’M GETTING TIRED OF THE IGNORANCE. MAYBE IF YOU LEARNED THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER, YOU MIGHT LEARN SOMETHING AND MAKE A BETTER SITUATION REGARDING THIS SITUATION. NEVER REALIZED HOW MUCH IGNORANCE WENT ON HERE ON THE NET AND IN EVERYDAY PUBLIC. IT’S TIME TO SMARTEN UP PEOPLE; YOU ARE DOING THIS GIRL AND HER FAMILY AN INJUSTICE. GROW UP PEOPLE!!
Cindy
shark
Did you know per a 1996 British Med Journal study that there is a 43% error in diagnosis concerning PVS? It is a notoriously hard condition to accurately diagnosis.
For a PVS diagnosis to be considered valid: the patient must exhibit no “evidence of awareness of self or environment” or “ability to interact with others.” As one neurologist put it, if a patient shows “any response to the outside world, the patient isn’t in a PVS.”
Terri does react with her environment. She responds to pain, she reacts to people talking in the room and she attempts speech.
And this woman was diagnosised PVS based on a CT scan (useless in oxygen deprivation cases) and two interviews, one 30 minutes and the one from Greer’s grand poobah Cranford that lasted 45 minutes.
This is unacceptable.
hey, Cin?
Instead of shouting insults, want to elighten us with facts?
And let me bottom line it for you. Why should Terri be put to death when there are people willing and able to take care of her?
Just goes to show you what the debate is really about, it is about removing the personhood of people, so that they no longer have those rights we appreciate so well, ya kow the right to LIFE, Libertya nd the pursuit of happiness for starters.
Silly me, I thought the REAL issue here legally was just who had the legal power and responsibility to make decisions regarding the medical care (or lack of) for Mrs. Schiavo.
As for this:
Did you know per a 1996 British Med Journal study that there is a 43% error in diagnosis concerning PVS? It is a notoriously hard condition to accurately diagnosis.
For a PVS diagnosis to be considered valid: the patient must exhibit no “evidence of awareness of self or environment” or “ability to interact with others.” As one neurologist put it, if a patient shows “any response to the outside world, the patient isn’t in a PVS.”
Terri does react with her environment. She responds to pain, she reacts to people talking in the room and she attempts speech.
And this woman was diagnosised PVS based on a CT scan (useless in oxygen deprivation cases) and two interviews, one 30 minutes and the one from Greer’s grand poobah Cranford that lasted 45 minutes.
Interesting. I’ve heard “opinions” and “experts” assert both sides. From what I can dope out, she seems to be PVS. If so, I stand by my opinion regarding taking the tube out. If she’s not, it’s a whole other story. All I can say is thank goodness I’m not in any way connected with this case, and my heart goes out to all involved.