This Saturday, March 31, will mark the second anniversary of the death by starvation and dehydration of Terri Schiavo. Too bad she wasn't a convicted murderer. She'd still be going through the appeals process.

Yes, had Terri been a convicted murderer, MSM would certainly have taken up her cause as well, like it did the 34-minute execution of convicted killer Angel Diaz . Did I mention Terri's execution took 14 days? Both were in Florida. Compare the coverage:

"[Gov. Jeb Bush's] intervention in the Terri Schiavo fiasco, without even talking to her husband, was unconscionable." ~ Orlando Sentinel, Dec. 28, 2006

"Gov. Jeb Bush was wise to suspend executions and order the review of lethal injection procedures after the bungled execution of a convicted murderer last week." ~ News-press.com, Dec. 19, 2006

That's just one example of the insanity....

Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, has documented many more.

And why was the media allowed to see the death of Diaz and not the death of Terri? Would they have described her demise as they did Diaz's? The Associated Press appeared to luxuriate in those gory details. In an article entitled, "Doctors: Botched execution likely slow, painful," it said:

Death penalty foes have for years warned of a worst-case scenario in which an inmate being executed by lethal injection could remain conscious, experiencing severe pain as he slowly dies. That day may finally have come.

"It really sounds like [Angel Diaz] was tortured to death," said Jonathan Groner, associate professor of surgery at the Ohio State Medical School.... "My impression is that it would cause an extreme amount of pain."...

"[W]itnesses reported movement of Diaz as long as 24 minutes after the first injection, with him grimacing, blinking, licking his lips, blowing and attempting to mouth words. At one point, about midway through the process, he turned his head toward witnesses....

"[T]urning one's head toward witnesses," interesting word choice.

Has it really been two years? I remember crying the day they took the feeding tubes out of her for the last time. It was such a sad, sad day. :(

Well - the only thing any of us can gain from the Terri Schaivo story is an acute awareness of how important it is to have a living will. Because I have one, thank God, I know I'll never have to suffer for years and years like she did. There was no right or wrong in that case - because none of us can ever be sure what she would have wanted. If she would have wanted to die, that would have been her right. If she didnt, that would have also been her right. And we'll never know which was the case.
You're never too young to have a living will...

As far as the death penalty goes Jill - even criminals have a constitutional right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. If there was something wrong with the method of execution, we have a legal and constitutional obligation to make sure the issues are addressed before anyone else is subjected to it.

You mean the day her suffering started to end was a sad day? Sometimes death is a sweet release. And she didn't starve to death or dehydrate to death. She was still hooked up to an IV. She was just taken off life support.

I could never imagine going through what Terri Schiavo went for. And it's well known by the people around me that I never want to be kept the way that she was. That's not living. That's not being "alive."

While I've heard pro-lifers say all the time, that abortion is trying to be God, was not keeping death at bay for Terri the same thing? She's out of pain now, isn't that what's important?

I doubt many of you know of Pedro Zamora. He was an amazing fellow, who was also taken off life support and died. And although he had the opportunity to tel his family that he wanted to, would you really want to force your loved one to lay as a vegetable in a hospital for years on end or would you rather let them move on?

If you're interested in reading about Pedro go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Zamora
http://www.aidsaction.org/pedro.htm

Anthony,

I beg to differ...
She was still hooked up to an IV. She was just taken off life support.

Terri Schiavo was NEVER on life support. Nor was she on an IV. She WAS starved to death. And she DID dehydrate.

She was perfectly healthy. She was not killed because she was sick. She was killed because her brain wasn't functioning at the same level as her husbands. (of course that is debatable as I seriously believe that it was her husband that was brain damaged.)

You can argue that Terri wasn't living a life that you would have liked. You can argue that Terri's brain was not functioning. But please don't argue about how she died. She was murdered. period. period. exclamation point. period.

mk

.... I remember how sad it was listening to each excruciating detail of her SLOW and PAINFUL death.
Her lips cracking from dehydration, her body shriveling and the parents not being able to do anything for their precious daughter!

It shouldn't surprise me though that the people who advocate killing Terri Shiavo are all pro-abortion. They're all in support of taking away a person's *choice* to live, just because they cannot voice their request in a way that they approve of. (Terri responded to "Do you want to live" with "I WAAAAAAAAA" and they didn't think it was worth caring about) Funny how CHOICE goes out the window when it's a helpless victim like Terri!

The Schiavo affair was a huge embarrassment to the GOP and helped show voters how completely the GOP has prostituted itself to the most irrational elements of the right-to-life industry.

It had a lot to do with why the GOP lost both houses of congress.

Danielle,

My father makes Terri Schiavo look like Einstein.
And he has been this way for over 7 years.

Before he became ill, he told me that he knew what was coming and that he would accept it. He endures everything that God sends His way, and he always has. He is a man of great faith. Every morning he would get up at 5:00 in the morning and say his prayers for a half an hour. Then he would go to mass. He offers up his suffering (and I know this because he told me)for whatever God decides to do with it. For us, for my son with the bi-polar, and most of all, (again I know this because he told me) for an end to abortion.

So please, don't tell me that he is not living because by his suffering united with Jesus' on the cross he is doing more living than most of us will ever do.

Suffering, freely offered, is the only true hope this world has. And as long as there is abortion, and child abuse, and war, and immorality, there will be a need for suffering to offset it.

We in the church call these people "victim souls" and we would all do well to get on our knees and thank them. Not eliminate them, but thank them. Because without them, this world would implode.

mk

In a vegetative state you aren't LIVING you're EXISTING. And there is a HUGE difference.

In a vegetative state you aren't LIVING you're EXISTING. And there is a HUGE difference.

Only to people who don't understand or respect life.

Weren't you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?

Accused us of not caring about the people that are here.

Do you hear yourself. Avoid suffering at ALL costs.
Pregnant? Suffering? Kill the kid. Old? Suffering? Take a pill? Causing suffering to society by being a burden? eliminate them. Brain not up to par? off with their head.

Suffering is part of life. And if you try to eliminate everyone and everything that has to suffer there will be no one left.

Plenty of people would say that they couldn't live with the pain of "depression"...Hell, I wouldn't want to live with depression...but I don't advocate killing you.

The problem is you keep telling yourself that you are putting these people out of their misery, when what you are really doing is putting them out of your misery.

MK

I hope we see more stuff like the Schiavo affair, where the right-to-life industry's shills in the republican party expose themselves to the voting public.

If I was in a vegetative state I would want them to pull the plug. My uncle who just died to cancer was the same way. He went home to die instead of going through more things to prolong his life. My gramma also says she doesn't want help when she gets to old age. She is completely against being put on life support.

Would you really just want to lie in a bed unable to interact with loved ones? Unable to do anything? Would you really? Or would you rather your family members give you to "God" and "Heaven."

While I cannot say what Terri wanted, I would never want to be like that. I'd rather die.

"Hell, I wouldn't want to live with depression...but I don't advocate killing you."

Naw, we do that for ourselves by slitting our wrists, jumping off buildings, overdosing, ect.

If I was in a vegetative state I would want them to pull the plug.

If you were in a vegetative state you wouldn't be capable of "wanting" them to pull the plug...or anything else.
mk

Which is way I let the people around me know that's what I want now in case something like that does happen.

Pro-deathers turns out to be a very, very accurate term.

Another awesome South Park episode:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/31/110/68729

Only to people who don't understand or respect life.

Weren't you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?

Accused us of not caring about the people that are here.

Do you hear yourself. Avoid suffering at ALL costs.
Pregnant? Suffering? Kill the kid. Old? Suffering? Take a pill? Causing suffering to society by being a burden? eliminate them. Brain not up to par? off with their head.

Suffering is part of life. And if you try to eliminate everyone and everything that has to suffer there will be no one left.

Plenty of people would say that they couldn't live with the pain of "depression"...Hell, I wouldn't want to live with depression...but I don't advocate killing you.

The problem is you keep telling yourself that you are putting these people out of their misery, when what you are really doing is putting them out of your misery.

MK

AMEN, Mk.

Who are you all to say that Terri would have wanted to have been kept alive? The woman was a bulimic, that's how she ended up in her vegetative state in the first place. Now, I'm not saying that she deserved to die because she had an eating disorder so do not misconstrue my words. I am just saying that people with bulimia usually have a major issue with their appearance, so if a pre vegetative state Terri could have seen how she would ultimately end up I doubt if she would choose to "live" on like that.

I have made it clear to my family that if I am ever in a persistent vegetative state that they are by no means to keep me alive by any way they can. I want them to just let me die because I feel by staying in a vegetative state I would be placing an undue burden on them emotionally and monetarily and that is unfair of me to do so.

If I ever become terminally ill, I will sign a DNR. I would like to move to Oregon so I can end my life peacefully on my terms, but I suppose I'll have to resort to unfortunately "illegal" means.

You must realize that by allowing somebody to die or by allowing euthanasia, you are being far more merciful than if you were to force them to stay alive using invasive and ludicrously expensive means.

Rae,

You'd love this man.

"Wishing not to subject his family to a slow and prolonged death as had occurred with his mother, Zamora stated his wish not to be kept alive by artificial means. Hospitalized and unable to speak for almost a month, being fed intravenously, and becoming completely unresponsive, his family honored his wishes, and withdrew life support, including medication, food and water. Surrounded by his family, Escarno, Winick and Ling, Zamora died at 4:40am EST on November 11, 1994,"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Zamora

I'm amazed at some of the comments posted here, and I have a question for those of you who consider yourselves to be Christians:

Why are you so afraid of death?

If you are a true Christian, you'll go to Heaven and be with God. You'll be with your family who've already passed on, and you can watch over your family left behind on Earth. Your loved ones will join you when God is ready to receive them. Why would you deny God's will by wanting to be kept alive by machines when there is absolutely no hope of you ever recovering consciousness?

I find this to be very disturbing. Who are we to resist God's will?

Danielle and Rae - do you guys have living wills?

I made mine before I went to Africa, just to be safe, and left a copy with my boyfriend, my parents, and my sister.

It says if I am not concsious and need anything artificial (life support or feeding tubes) to keep me alive for more than 30 days, I want whatever that is turned off.

Who are you all to say that Terri would have wanted to have been kept alive? The woman was a bulimic, that's how she ended up in her vegetative state in the first place. Now, I'm not saying that she deserved to die because she had an eating disorder so do not misconstrue my words. I am just saying that people with bulimia usually have a major issue with their appearance, so if a pre vegetative state Terri could have seen how she would ultimately end up I doubt if she would choose to "live" on like that.

WOW Rae. It's enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too.

If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?

Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide... Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?

Couldn't they say they were doing what her wishes stated?

I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation.

An important fact to remember, Terry Shiavo was NOT kept alive artificially with life support. She was living and breathing fine on her own. ALL she required was FOOD and WATER to survive...that's all anyone needs. It infuriates me that people try to twist this into a life support debate.

I don't, but both me and my boyfriend will probably get one once we start riding again (motorcycles). His dad died this summer in an accident. So Adam sold his bike, but seeing as the need to ride has been ingrained in him since childhood, he wants to buy another one.

And while I know that it's dangerous to ride, there's no place I'd rather be than on the back of that bike with him. But knowing the danger means that one has to be ready (or as ready as one can be) for the worst to happen.

"If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?

Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide... "

I wish someone could have helped me. I was too much of a coward to press just a little bit hard with the knife.

"WOW Rae. It's enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too."

How is it sad? It's practical and it's what I feel is right. My family agrees with me. Both my parents have made it clear to me as well that they do NOT want to be kept alive artificially if something were to happen. It's not a matter of what's worth living or not, but being a burden. Some people have a problem with being a burden on others, some don't. I happen to be one who feels it is wrong to be a burden on others, so I'm putting measures in place to make sure that doesn't happen.

Danielle:

The same goes for me, I was just a little too scared to step into traffic...just a little too scared to take that entire bottle of Tylenol.

But now that I'm on my medication, I fortunately don't feel that way anymore, and I hope you are the same. :)

"But now that I'm on my medication, I fortunately don't feel that way anymore, and I hope you are the same. :)"

Yeah, I feel much better, but still have a long way to go.

We have to be careful about projecting our feelings onto others. I would never want to live like that so that person must want to die. Would any of us have wanted to live like the late actor Christopher Reeve? Did he want to live totally paralyzed? Certainly not. I think there is no doubt though that Mr. Reeve greatly valued his life, as difficult as it was, and very much wanted to live. He was a strong advocate for the disabled and while I did not always agree with him politically, I had tremendous respect for him and the inspiration he gave others. He could have terminated it at any time by simply saying he no longer wanted to be on a ventilator, which was the only reason he was alive.
From what I have read, Terri was severely brain damaged, not vegetative. Her nurses, as well as her family maintained that she responded to her environment. I have worked with severely brain damaged patients, and KNEW that they comprehended much more than they were able to communicate. No one can ever know for certain what Terri thought or comprehended. The human brain is highly complex and poorly understood. I've very happily witnessed amazing and unexpected recoveries. I worked with a neurosurgeon who was adamant about never predicting the prognosis of a brain injured patient, no matter how hopeful or hopeless it seemed. Brain injuries were just too unpredictable.
Terri had a family that loved her and wanted to care for her. Her husband was free to divorce her and make a life for himself, which he had already done with a new girlfriend and family. He did not have to burden himself with Terri. Why not just let her family have her? How he could turn a cold shoulder to the desperate pleas of her parents is beyond me.
There is so much we don't know and never will. I have read various accounts that have not made it into the general media.
Be very careful of the term "vegetative". Brain damage can cover a wide range of symptoms and disability. "Vegetative" is open to the interpretation and bias of the observer. It is used much too freely and all too often by people who have no medical knowledge.
Among the people demonstrating to put the feeding tube back into Terri was a woman confined to a wheelchair who described herself as "a liberal, agnostic lesbian" strongly supportive of the rights of the disabled. So much for this being some right wing religious issue.

Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide... "

I wish someone could have helped me. I was too much of a coward to press just a little bit hard with the knife.

Well Danielle, I am thankful that they did not help you, because even though you may not realize it, you are here for a reason, and there are people here on this earth who love you and it would shatter their world if you were gone.

Even though I may not agree with you on anything you have to say on this site about abortion, I do recognize that you are a person who God created with a purpose, even though I do not know what it is... and I believe that one day you will know what that purpose is.

I am thankful that you are here, and I hope that one day, your depression will stop completely, and you can learn to enjoy life again. There are too many good things, too many beautiful things about life to want to end it so soon. You still have a long way to go, and you can't see over that hill yet, but I'm guessing one day you'll get there. And I hope that when you do, you'll thank yourself for not going through with the suicide.

You did not have the courage to cut yourself with the knife because deep down you know that you want to live, because life is worth living, and the people you care about would miss you terribly. Your life is precious.

Actually, Bethany, it was I, not Rae, who posted what you copyed and pasted before your post. But I agree with her, I wouldn't want to be a burden on my family if I was ever in a PVS. And why wouldn't you as a Christian (I presume) want the poor woman to go to live with God, with a new perfect body. The "life" she had wasn't a real life, it was laying in a bed gorked out and being fed through a tube. If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?

Rae, I find it fascinating that you couldn't answer SUCH a simple question. Instead you avoided it by talking about artificial life support again, which, by the way has nothing to do with the Terry Shiavo case, since she was not kept alive by life support, only by being given food and water...what every other human being on this earth needs to survive.

Bethany said: "An important fact to remember, Terry Shiavo was NOT kept alive artificially with life support. She was living and breathing fine on her own. ALL she required was FOOD and WATER to survive...that's all anyone needs. It infuriates me that people try to twist this into a life support debate."

In a way, it was a life-support debate, because Terry was incapable of swallowing and taking in food and water on her own. I just read up on the case again, and frankly, there was no one home inside her head. Read the report on what the autopsy found: her brain was less than half the size it should have been for a woman of her size and age. There was extensive damage to the remaining mass of tissue. There was no possible way she would have recovered from that severe of a loss of neurons. All the doctors, pathologists, etc., agreed on that. Whatever was in her that made her Terry had already moved on. Wasn't it time to let the body move on as well?

"You did not have the courage to cut yourself with the knife because deep down you know that you want to live, because life is worth living"

Actually no. It was because I was scared of the unknown. Of what happens when you die. Nice try though.

Bethany...I have no idea what you're talking about. You never asked me a question. Could you please repeat the question you allegedly asked me please?

And also at the time that I was extremely suicidal there was no one to care. I didn't let anyone close enough to care because I wanted to end it all and didn't want anyone to be hurt by me dying.

Now I have my boyfriend to think of. He just lost his father suddenly and I know it would devastate him to loose me as well.

Rae, you wrote: "The same goes for me, I was just a little too scared to step into traffic...just a little too scared to take that entire bottle of Tylenol."

Those are both very poor ways to commit suicide.

Use potassium cyanide or sodium cyanide. Available at any chemical supply store.

Bethany, quit criticizing Rae for not answering a question when you have not answered my question. That is hypocrisy.

Here it is again, Rae:

WOW Rae. It's enlightening to see what makes life more worth living and what makes it less worth living in your mind. Saddening too.

If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?

Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide... Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?

Couldn't they say they were doing what her wishes stated?

I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation.

Be honest.

JK,
If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?

I would do whatever God asked of me. He did not take Terri, so obviously he felt that she still had something to give. Ironically, Pope John Paul II was suffering terribly at the same time as Terri. He united his suffering with her and lived and died as a witness to the Truth that there is good to be gained from suffering aand to trust that God will take you He takes you.

Once again I ask:

If nobody believes in God, why does everyone want to be Him????

I think I have to get off line now, because this has depressed me beyond words. I knew that you all believed in abortion, I tried to see how you could take that view and I tried to honestly respect your views...but now, I don't know. It's like I'm talking to aliens from another planet.

I feel sick. I'm gonna take a break. I don't want to say or do anything that will be called "unchristian" though I'm beginning to doubt if most of you know what that even means.

Pray for me. I'll pray for you. But this is honestly too much for me.

God Bless,
MK

You ask us why we want to play God? If you let the God take care of Terri, she would have died. Instead there was medical intervention, keeping her alive! How is allowing her to die playing God more so than keeping her alive artificially?

And why wouldn't you as a Christian (I presume) want the poor woman to go to live with God, with a new perfect body. The "life" she had wasn't a real life, it was laying in a bed gorked out and being fed through a tube. If YOU had the choice would you choose to be a gorked out nursing home patient or a spirit in heaven where you can spend time with God and Jesus?

It is not my choice to make. God has a plan for everyone, and I truly believe that. I believe God had a plan for Terry, and just because "I" can't understand why she has to go through years with just feeding tubes, I am not God, and do not think that I should play God by taking a life. That is His call.

Maybe what Terry needed was those extra years with emotional bonding with her parents. You don't know. Maybe this is what she needed and maybe in those years while she had her parents love and devotion, she was healed from the sadness she had before going into the coma.

If sending someone to heaven is a good excuse to kill, then wouldn't it be ok for me to kill any random person that I see, who looked like they might have the slightest amount of suffering, under the guise that I was doing it to "send them to Heaven"?

Actually, I seem to remember a woman cutting her baby's arms off and letting the baby bleed to death while saying she was sending the baby to heaven. Does this sound like the action of a sane person to you?

A Sane and rational person does not kill people to put them in Heaven.

Anyway, answered your question.

How do you know it wasn't God who let the decision for her to die come to pass? How do YOU know what God does and what he doesn't do?

MK this discussion makes me feel physically ill also.

OOps better not say that too loud...they may want to euthanize me to put me out of my suffering!

You say that we try to play God, but you try to talk for Him.

Actually, you did not answer the question. I want to know if the choice was YOURS. People like to hide behind God when faced with big decisions, but this is a hypothetical one. I would appreciate YOUR choice on the matter.

She wasn't being kept alive by artificial means, Danielle.

Do I have to keep repeating myself? She required:
food
Water
a place to live

Hmm, sounds like what most people need in order to survive.

"how do I know what God does and doesn't do"...I know God does not advocate murder because it says so in the Bible.
Therefore, if someone murders, I know it is going against God. There you go!

JK, I would choose the hospital life. Because I do not like killing people, period.

But if "everything happens for a reason," then Terri also died for a reason. You can't pick and choose what everything as you so choose. If everything happens for a reason. That means everything. Terri dying, abortion, ect.

"She was not breathing and had no pulse. They attempted to resuscitate her, she was defibrillated several times, and transported to the Humana Northside Hospital. There she was intubated, ventilated, and eventually given a tracheotomy."

So rescesitating her isn't play God?

"If a depressed girl, bullemic, anorexic, abused, whatever, wants to die because she feels unworthy or unloved, is the solution to kill her?

Would it be ok if someone helped her commit suicide... Or would you consider that murder, if she seemed healthy otherwise?

Couldn't they say they were doing what her wishes stated?

I am curious to see how you would feel in this situation. "

In that situation I would say the girl was in need of psychiatric help. Psychiatric problems like anorexia, bulimia and depression are different from terminal illnesses and persistant vegetative states. So in those cases, according to the law, by assisting a suicidal (because of mental illness) person you would be committing murder (or manslaughter).

But if "everything happens for a reason," then Terri also died for a reason. You can't pick and choose what everything as you so choose. If everything happens for a reason. That means everything. Terri dying, abortion, ect.

Yes, I actually agree with you on this. Just as Joseph was sold to his brothers into slavery and that was a BAD thing, God turned it into a GOOD thing in the end. God does great stuff like that.

Terry's death was an wakeup call for all of us who respect life, to stand up for what we believe before it's too late! She had a purpose, even in death. Of course, That doesn't make her murder any less horrible. The people who supported it and had something to do with it will be held accountable.

The doctor who performed Terri's autopsy reported that he found no evidence that she had ever been bulimic, the condition with which Michael Schaivo accused her gynecologist of neglecting to diagnose her. He won a million dollars when he sued on that basis. The court of Florida, in the case that came to be known as Schaivo III, allowed diagnoses by five doctors to determine Terri's potential for recovery. The two appointed by her husband reported independently that she was in a Persistent Vegitative State. The court-appointed neurologist also diagnosed her with PVS. The two specialists chosen by her parents reported her to be in a state of minimal consciousness. The same court reviewed a six-hour tape, including footage of Terri with her parents, and the judge stated that she did not consistently respond to them.

The fact that the courts ruled over and over that Terri's tube should be removed indicates that they believed this would be the best decision for her. Her parents are Roman Catholic, which contributed greatly to their opposition to the removal of the tube. If they had not fought her husband at every turn, the case would probably never have been brought to national attention.

I just wonder why, when you dont fight a person's DNR or contest a living will, it is so incredibly different when the person closest to her and then the courts find this to be in her best interest.

I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but Terry Shiavo was already dead. Pulling out the feeding tube just let her body go with her mind.

She had no measurable consciousness of her environment. She had no cognitive ability. Her awareness was minimal. She had no enjoyment, no understanding, no measurable thoughts.

A person is a measure of their thoughts and choices in life. Terry was incapable of making either of those. Her life was already over.

Bethany -

You keep insisting that Terri Schiavo was not kept alive by artificial means. Drinking water is not artificial. Eating food is not artificial. This is true. However, Terri was on a feeding tube that went directly into her stomach. If food was placed in her mouth, she was not capable of eating. If water was placed in her mouth, she was not capable of drinking. An artificial method of supplying her food, a tube shoved down her throat that went directly into her stomach, was the only thing that was keeping her alive. If you don't think that supplying someone with food by a tube directly to the stomach is artificial, then I'm not sure what you consider artificial. I would have to agree with Danielle. When she was initially resuscitated and brought back to life, that was an artificial means of trying to keep her alive. I am not saying that doctors should not attempt to resuscitate patients, but without medical intervention she would have stayed dead, and with medical intervention she lived by a tube in her stomach for years. She was blind because her visual cortex was damaged and her brain at autopsy was half the size of what would be expected. She was non-responsive. I know the family probably thought she was responsive and interpreted certain things, but they were drawing at straws. They wanted her to be responsive, so they saw anything, the blink of an eye, as a response.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

Terry Schiavo for congress!

... and Bob Dornan for prez!

The number-one, true pro-lifer. The pro-lifer's pro-lifer.

Bob Dornan!

Samantha,

I've reposted this here because it's about to be dropped. Let me know when you've read these so I don't have to worry about moving them, okay?
Thanks.

Okay Samantha,

First some background:

In the Catholic church (as far as I know, only the Catholic church) believes that at the consecration (the right performed at a mass prior to communion) a priest, by virtue of the powers invested in him at ordination (the sacrament of taking holy vows to become a priest)changes ordinary bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus.

We believe that at that moment we are transported back in time and take part in the crucifixion as it is happening...

Every object has two forms. The accident and the substance. A piece of white bread is white in color and soft in texture. This is called the accident. The outward appearance.

It is made of flour, water, sugar, and butter. This is it's substance.

If you put this piece of bread in the toaster and toast it, the outside (accident) will change and it will no longer be soft and white.

But the substance remains unchanged. So the accident changes, the substance remains the same.

In the act of consecration, we (Catholics) believe that the accidents (appearance) of bread and wine remains the same, while the substance changes and becomes something else. The body and blood of Jesus. Still looks like bread and wine, but it no longer is bread and wine.

Other churches, like the Lutheran church, believe in something called consubstantiation. They believe that the accident and substance remain the same but that Jesus exists in addition to the bread and wine. After communion, He leaves. This is why they can throw their communion wafers away when they are done with them.

In our church, once it has become body and blood it must be eaten, drunk or placed in a tabernacle under lock and key. (The tabernacle in the old testament held the word of God, or the torah and ten commandments. Our tabernacle holds the word made flesh.

Most protestant churches believe that the bread and wine are mere symbols, a meal to be shared with the "community" and can therefore be walnut bread and grape juice.

In the Catholic church it must be unleavened bread and wine mixed with water.

Now we know that an enemy will strike at the heart of his foe. And we know that the "heart" of the Catholic church is the Eucharist (the bread after it has been changed). This is why the Eucharist is attacked. Stolen or desecrated by those who hate the church. Or in the case of protestant churches "watered down" to become merely a symbol. Strike the Eucharist and you strike the very center of our faith. (No offense to protestants, I just need to set the stage here).

Throughout history, there have been times when a communion host has actually begun to bleed. These hosts are then scientifically examined. The blood type always comes back AB, and often the host is found to have turned to human flesh, most often, part of a heart.

Many of these hosts can still be seen today. They do not disintegrate as a normal host would.

Go to these links to see stories and pictures:
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html
http://biblia.com/jesusart/eucharistic.htm

Notice that some of these miracles have happened as recently as 1993.
enjoy!
mk

You might also enjoy this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cbGCQyP_uk

mk

MK says:

"She was perfectly healthy...her brain didn;t function on the same level as her husband's.

Only to people who don't understand or respect life.

Weren't you the one asking if we only cared about people that were unborn?"

MK sometimes you seem so intelligent and the again you seem so- I don;t know. She was NOT perfectly healthy. HER BRAIN WAS ALMOST DEAD! It did not function at all! Just because her body looked intact does not mean SHE WAS HEALTHY!!! I guess it can be confusing when someone looks intact and has got open eyes. But face it, she was as little 'alive' as a person as an unborn before viability.

What makes you as a human special, what makes you a person? The fact that your body exists when it is hooked onto external support or the fact that your body is inhabited by a soul, consciousness, and the ability to actually live?!

And her 'execution' did not take 14 days; her dying had already lasted all those years she had been kept in a vegitative state. Why would you even fret so much over her death? There are 24 000 *conscious* people dying every day of preventable hunger, feeling the pain of it and no one gives a sh*t about covering them in the news. Why don;t we all worry about that for a change instead of a single pathetic case of allowing someone to pass away?

I remember the "wizard" in the "Wizard of Oz" telling Dorothy that a man is not measured by how much he loves, but by how much he is loved.

If we use this criteria then Terri Schiavo's life was worth much.

She was loved by her parents.
She was loved by her siblings.
If nothing else, this made Terri "special".
This made Terri a person.

My father is loved by my mother.
My father is loved by my siblings.
My father is loved by me.
My father will go home when he is called.
He will not go home because you think he is useless.

Do you guys realize that you have spent an entire evening discussing how many ways a person should die or be killed.

Kill me with a knife.
Kill me with pills.
Kill me with a car.
Kill yourself with cyanide.
Kill all the vegetables.
Kill people on life support.
Kill unwanted babies.
Kill people who are suffering.
Kill me when I'm suffering

And you wonder why we call it a "culture of death"

I'm also fascinated by the fact that more than half of you suffer from depression. I can't help but wonder if there isn't a connection there.

So many of you have tried to kill yourselves.
All of you think unwanted babies should die.
You think people who are suffering should die.

It seems to me you have very little respect for life. In any form. Easy come, easy go.

I'm really sad for all of you. You're lives must be hell sometimes.

Danielle,
You say you now have a boyfriend who loves you.
I believe he does.
But what if God forbid, that changed. Would you revert back to being suicidal? Does your self worth, self love and self respect rely totally on his loving you? That's a lot of pressure to put on someone.

I don't know what else to say. Just that I hope you guys don't represent the general population.

I pray that you are an anomaly and not the norm.
Because if this is the way the majority of your generation thinks, we're in a lot of trouble.

mk

You know, MK, I don't doubt that the day will come that these same people who do not value others lives will begin supporting the death of born children with mental retardation , downs syndrome, cerebral palsy, autism, etc... because their brains don't function as ours, and "obviously" they're just "existing, not living". Right?
After all, who would choose to live their life like that? I guess they should all be "put out of their misery", because although they have family who cares about them and wants them to live, they just don't have the brain function of "normal" people, so they should not be living here to continue to be a "burden" to others.

Oh the day is coming. It's already here since they support it in the womb, but they haven't yet formulated their arguments well enough for killing these children out of the womb yet. Oh wait, they have. They've defended women who killed their newborn babies...and people like Andrea Yates. Forgot about that.

The day is coming where these same people, who hate God and believe we decended from Apes, will want to kill children and adults with Leukemia or other types of cancer, painful back problems, people who are paralized, people who have brain cancer, people who have any other kind of disease that causes them suffering.... they'll advocate killing them to (like Danielle mentioned) "send them to Heaven!", or because "they're suffering, why would they want to continue living that way? They might say they want to live, but do they really?" Besides, they're costing people a LOT OF MONEY.

Hey, they may argue with me about this and say they would never do that because the people in question can voice their opinions and say they want to live, or whatever. But I know it's only a matter of time. After all, the arguments in this post already support killing any person who has any amount of suffering. Because apparently, people shouldnt have to suffer? It's scary, really, to think about.

I sure hope that by the time I am old, if I have a disease like Alzheimers, people like these don't try to kill me because my brains' not totally there.

It's really sad how little these people respect life of others, but it does make sense that most of them talk about trying to kill themselves too. They respect their own lives almost as little as the people around them.

I wanted to add something to what you said MK.You can't look to another human being for long and try to find happiness.It just wont work.I went through a phase too. I decided that I wasn't going to believe in Christ,God....nobody.I was going to lean to the arms of flesh to find my solace too.My life just got worse and worse.I'd reach for my bible and then put it away.It was a REAL struggle.It still is.However,I've found that nobody of the opposite sex was able to figure it out anymore than I.So,I turned back to God.I can ask him for the guidance I need.I get my answers.Life was so very lonely without him.

PS Giving a guy casual sex leads to one end result.They will eventually chew you up and spit you out.

Bethany,

Thank God you are here. Sorry I abandoned you last night. It just got to be too much.

I agree with every word you have spoken. Just now and all throughout these last few weeks.

I just pray psychosis isn't contagious. Sometimes (like last night) I just cry myself to sleep.

There is so much beauty in the world. Baby bunnies, children's laughter, rain on a tent,
fat clouds...but all of this is created by Him.

That which is created by us seems to get uglier and uglier.

I actually yelled at God last night. I told Him that He needs to either show His face soon or start pouring grace and mercy on this poor world.

I asked Him how it was possible to allow these beautiful young people, so full of hope and promise to become so rotted and soiled. Where is He? Why doesn't he help them?

I know I have to trust Him. I know He loves them.
I love them, though I don't know why. I love them enough to beg Him, in tears, to do something to save them.

God help us Bethany. God help our children.
God help the Terri Schiavo's and the little babes, and the old people and the sick.

All I can say, is they will reap what they sow.
I can't even imagine how this world is going to be in ten years. We are going to be stuck in a world created by narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-hating individuals and that will be the only time I will wonder if the "suffering" is too much.

Because, there are worse things than dying.

MK

Mom,
Big Hugs...:)
MK

I despise your all's generalizations that all pro choice individuals are lining people up for the slaughter. The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered "normal". Why would you want someone that was suffering imensely to be dragged on for years and years in that state? To me this is cruelty. And if a person's quality of life is measured by how much other people love them, then nearly everyone currently 6 feet under would also be considered "alive". The Schindlers were keeping Terri alive for their own benefit, not for Terri's. She is in a better place now, where she has a new body and a new mind.

The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered "normal".

As has already been stated ad nauseum, and by the way, proven, Terri was not in a persistent vegetative state. You choose to ignore this and just go on stating it as if it's a fact.

Productive to whom? Maybe she was not productive in YOUR eyes, but her family saw value in her. In Terri's case, her life was very productive, in that when she was alive, her parents had comfort in being able to take care of her, and to give her love and get it in return. She gave comfort to her family, and was responsive to them... of course, it wasn't the kind of response you would consider "normal".... but how is giving your family comfort and love "unproductive"? She wasn't doing things that you consider worthwhile?
Who are you to call her worthless just because you don't think she's "normal enough"?

If the quality of life depends on how productive you are...

What about people who are paralized and actually can't do anything but talk and need assistance for most of their daily needs? How productive do you measure their life to be?

What about people who are old and in nursing homes, being waited on hand and foot by nurses? How productive do you measure their lives to be?

What do you think is "productive"?...please define "productive".

JK,

I despise your all's generalizations that all pro choice individuals are lining people up for the slaughter.

And I despise having to make these generalizations.
Unfortunately, after listening to all of you last night, this is the only conclusion I can come to.

The difference between a person who is suffering in a PVS state and a child with down syndrome is the child with down syndrome is coherent and highly capable of living a productive life albeit not one that would be considered "normal"

Thank you for clearing that up. So people with down's are safe provided they were allowed to be born in the first place. But people with PVS don't deserve to live because you said so. Okay.

Why don't you just make up a list of people that you think should be allowed to live and people you think should be put of misery. Then I won't accidentally mention anybody in the "death" group that you would deem worthy of living. I Wouldn't want to offend your sensibilities.

I remember the "wizard" in the "Wizard of Oz" telling Dorothy that a man is not measured by how much he loves, but by how much he is loved.

If we use this criteria then Terri Schiavo's life was worth much.

And I said that this was a measure of whether they were alive or not, where? I believe I said that how much they were loved was a measure of how much they were worth...

mk

Not with a dictionary definition by the way...your own.

To all of you who say, "I wouldn't want to live that way," I don't think anybody would choose to live disabled. But they do. I'm sure my sister didn't want to live that way. But she did. There are a lot of ways we wouldn't want to live.

But who are we to decide who has a good enough quality of life? Who are we to decide it's ok or not ok to kill somebody?

This is so common sense. We care for someone who needs our help. End of story.

But there's no common sense anymore. We try to think of all these rationalizations to kill people just because they are disabled.

Bobby, I am so glad to see you here. What you're doing to help others after what happened to your sister is so wonderful. God is really using you in such a great way.

Bobby asks

"But who are we to decide who has a good enough quality of life?"

Quite easily. if someone does not have a brain anymore that functions on a level other than the vegitaive state, the person exists, but does not have a life. To speak of quality in this case is almost funny, if it wasn't as off the point.

"Who are we to decide it's ok or not ok to kill somebody?"

Who are we to decide to keep someone floating between here and heaven by keeping them on atrificial life support for years? It is playing God just as much.

Mr. Schindler,

You are the best thing I have seen on this blog in a long time.

God Bless You.

I was just praying to Terri, asking her to talk some sense into these people.

And here you are. An answer to a prayer. Sorry you have to hear all of these hateful things being said about your sweet sister.

My father is in the same state Terri was and I thank God every day that we still have him with us. He brings me such joy. He is my hero. I am closer to him now than I was before his dementia.

When he looks me in the eye and I see him come to the surface, my heart soars. I'm sure you felt the same way.

God Bless you and Keep You,
You and your family are always in my prayers,
Love,
Mary Kay Hastings

I'm gonna write a book someday and call it:

"I'm not dead yet. Just don't ask me to dance"
mk

Quite easily. if someone does not have a brain anymore that functions on a level other than the vegitaive state, the person exists, but does not have a life. To speak of quality in this case is almost funny, if it wasn't as off the point.

AGAIN....Terry was NOT in a persistent vegetative state! This is getting ridiculous.

And Terry did have a LIFE. Look life up in the dictionary. Maybe it wasn't what YOU consider to be worthwhile, but it was a LIFE. Twist it all you want, say she wasn't as "productive" as you'd like her to be, her brain didn't work like yours or mine.... but the fact remains, she was alive, and she had the love of her family and she loved them in return.

Who are we to decide to keep someone floating between here and heaven by keeping them on atrificial life support for years? It is playing God just as much.

No. Playing God is when you decide that YOU have the answers and can pick and choose who gets to die and who gets to live.

A Good doctor HEALS patients and tries to keep them alive. A bad doctor tries to find excuses to kill.

speaking of brains only working on the level of a vegetative state...

No, I won't go there. It would be unchristian. And besides, it's self evident.
mk

and again, TERRY WAS NOT HOOKED UP TO ARTIFICIAL LIFE SUPPORT.
Maybe you can read it with capital letters.

Joe, you say my sister was in a "vegetative state." You say she was on "artificial life support." You are wrong on both counts. Read my column today that Jill linked to (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54935).

If you read what I wrote, you will see your response is actually an example of what I said. You prove my point.

Thanks to all of you who supported my sister and still support our family.

speaking of brains only working on the level of a vegetative state...

No, I won't go there. It would be unchristian. And besides, it's self evident.
mk

It surely is.

"No. Playing God is when you decide that YOU have the answers and can pick and choose who gets to die and who gets to live."

Ok. So, keeping Terry alive was NOT deciding who got to live? It was not the parents thinking THEY had the answer? Do you see your one way 'logic'?

Quie frankly I really do not care whether she existed or died. It was up to people to whom she meant something.

Ok. So, keeping Terry alive was NOT deciding who got to live? It was not the parents thinking THEY had the answer? Do you see your one way 'logic'?

Yes, you've got it right. Doctors should help people live, not help people die.

Bobby,

sorry I didn't read anything about your sister, bless her. I simply referred to Terry in my post.

Haha right Bethany, so as long as people play God the way it satisfies your sentiments, it is totally acceptable?

No, the Bible is clear on what God allows and does not allow. He does not allow murder, he does allow saving lives.

Joe, all Terri required help with in order to live was food and water. Do you really mean to say it is playing God to help people eat and drink?

And to your last point, I wish the courts had agreed.

Productive meaning having the ability to contribute physically or intellectually to society. i.e. Stephen Hawking may be paralyzed by Lou Gehrigs disease but his brain is currently still fully functional. Also, If he so wished to be "euphanized" he would have the ability to express that wish.

It is not just to be someone's "pet" or something that exists just to be the object of someone's love. How come you want to keep denying people in immense suffering the opportunity to move on to be with God? I thought as a Christian that is the ultimate goal.

What about people who sign DNR papers? Do you want to go against their expressed wishes just because their families love them want to keep them around for awhile?

JK,

Brick wall...brick wall...brick wall....

That's gonna leave a mark.
mk

It is not just to be someone's "pet" or something that exists just to be the object of someone's love. How come you want to keep denying people in immense suffering the opportunity to move on to be with God? I thought as a Christian that is the ultimate goal.

Hmm...so people who are suffering in any way should be killed so they can go to Heaven?

Here's something i asked and never got an answer to by any of you:

If sending someone to heaven is a good excuse to kill, then wouldn't it be ok for me to kill any random person that I see, who looked like they might have the slightest amount of suffering, under the guise that I was doing it to "send them to Heaven"?

Actually, I seem to remember a woman cutting her baby's arms off and letting the baby bleed to death while saying she was sending the baby to heaven. Does this sound like the action of a sane person to you?

A Sane and rational person does not kill people to put them in Heaven.

Do they? Should they? In your opinion.

Yes, your subtle references to my intellectual capabilities are EXTREMELY Christian of you. Just because I don't line up as a sheep in your field does not mean I am lacking brain cells, its quite the opposite. People like you all are the reason there are so many atheists in the world.

Great,

Jill and I agree. I seriously think those people who wanted to keep her should have decided over it. After all it was only them really who was affected. And even if they do have such a distorted picture of human dignity, it is not up for a court to interfere.

I do have respect for human life. I simply also have some respect for human dignity.

Bethany, you are grasping at straws. What's done is done, nothing anyone says here is going to bring her back to life.

JK you aren't answering my question..

And I never said that anything we say is going to bring her to life...what made you say that?

I think this issue should raise awareness of the fact that OTHER people are going through the same thing as Terri Shiavo, even if theirs isn't publicized as hers was. I hope that if anything, this issue will help others learn how to respect human life, and realize that regardless of whether those people are not the same as us, they are still worthy of life, and have friends and family who care about them deeply.

I also hope it will expose the lies of people like you, who continue to say that Terri was kept alive artificially, when the facts state otherwise.

Go ahead, keep lying, people are watching.

Mr. Schindler,

Thank you for joining this discussion. I posted a comment earlier that I hope you will read. I have worked with brain damaged patients and realize all too well that a PVS diagnosis can be subject to the bias of the observer. The public is mostly misinformed on this subject in addition to our society's strong bias against the disabled.
How interesting that the professional observations and opinions of the mostly female nurses who cared for your sister, and who wholeheartedly supported her, were brushed off as their "emotional attachment" to Terri. Male doctors of course always make professional observations and give professional opinions.
Michael Schiavo was portrayed as the devoted husband. We can never know what truly goes on in a marriage or how truly "devoted" any spouse really is. I will say this, when a person dies mysteriously, the first person police will suspect is the "devoted" spouse. I never could understand why he didn't allow your family to have Terri and care for her. Its not like he was going to be burdened with her care. His callous disregard to the pleas of your parents spoke volumes about this man, in my opinion anyway.
I wish you and your family the best.

On the above reference to Stephen Hawking. Yes he is able to function mentally, the man is a genius. The fact remains he is totally dependent on others for his care and survival. He must be tube fed, and there are certainly other aspects of his care that must be tended to on a daily basis that I will not elaborate on here. He cannot speak or move and has been deteriorating physically for years. Yet the man certainly values his life. Would it be your or my choice to live like him? Certainly not. Its not his either. Don't we look at someone like that and say we would prefer to die rather than live like this?
That's the point I made earlier about projecting our feelings onto others, assuming people don't want to or wouldn't want to live because their lives don't fit our idea of "quality" or "perfection".

Mary,

Well put. I always welcome your "voice of reason".
You are able to put things in ways that I am not.
Thank you.

mk

MK

I appreciate your kind words. They made my day. Have a great weekend everyone!

I do not take kindly to being called a liar. People do not "naturally" eat out of tubes in their stomachs, so a feeding tube is an artificial thing.

You go ahead and believe what you believe and I will continue believing how I believe. That's what being pro-choice is all about, not necessarily believing in something but respecting the fact that people can choose it if they so desire. If you think abortion is morally reprehensible, then don't get one. If you want to be kept alive at any cost do not sign a DNR and be sure to make it clear to your loved ones what your wishes are. BUT DO NOT JUDGE OTHERS IF THEY DO NOT CHOOSE THE SAME PATHS AS YOU. Do not call people stupid and brain dead for disagreeing with your opinions, and do not harass girls who have chosen to have an abortion, it is their matter, not yours.

Ban me if you want but in this life you will eventually have to listen to people who disagree with you.

Still couldn't answer the question, huh?

Do not call people stupid and brain dead for disagreeing with your opinions, and do not harass girls who have chosen to have an abortion, it is their matter, not yours.

They can choose to have an abortion but we cannot choose to speak out against it? What kind of America would we be living in if that were true?

Also, I don't see anyone on here harrassing women who had abortions.

You can debate politely without resulting to degrading and name calling. I believe the constitution gives you the right to protest peacefully, but there are plenty of pro lifers who will throw things at women seeking abortions.

And about your question if it will make you happy. There is a difference between people who are suffering because they're having a bad day and people suffering from a terminal illness. I frankly feel that you are insulting Terri and her family by even comparing the two.

You should not randomly shoot people based on how you feel about them. There, is that a good enough answer?

And you never seem to answer my questions, so why should I have to answer yours?

Please Google these people:

Steve Chiappa
Glenda Hickey

These two people have locked-in syndrom. The doctors all said they were vegtables and didn't know what was going on around them. Their families were encouraged to let them die.

Oops, they were conscience and knew everything around them. I asked this on another post and I will ask it here. How do we know? We keep telling everyone to "let them go in peace" that we never give them a chance. How many of these locked-in people were put to death? They say that this is rare, but how do they know, they keep letting people like this die!

A quadraplegic has to have total help in eating, some even need to be fed through a tube.

My cousin's son had to be fed through a tube too, did he deserve to starve because he couldn't swallow, move correctly or communicate like you and I do?

You can debate politely without resulting to degrading and name calling. I believe the constitution gives you the right to protest peacefully, but there are plenty of pro lifers who will throw things at women seeking abortions.

I called you a liar. You lied, so I wasn't calling names. You said that Terri Shiavo was in a persistent vegetative state, and you also said that she sustained by artificial life support. You and I both know that does not mean being fed through a tube.

By the way, what does women throwing things at women have to do with me taking advantage of my right to free speech on a blog?

And about your question if it will make you happy. There is a difference between people who are suffering because they're having a bad day and people suffering from a terminal illness. I frankly feel that you are insulting Terri and her family by even comparing the two.

The question was "Would you advocate killing a person who was suffering to send them to heaven?" and also, my second question was, "Do sane people kill people to send them to Heaven?"

I wasn't talking about depression, I was talking about physically suffering.

You should not randomly shoot people based on how you feel about them. There, is that a good enough answer?

I'm not talking about randomly shooting anyone. I'm talking about seeking out the particular people who are suffering miserably, and putting them "out of their misery" by killing them and "sending them to Heaven". Wouldn't this be an act of mercy in your eyes?

Does anyone have that right? To look at a person and decide for themselves that a person is suffering too much, and then decide that person should be killed? Why should anyone have that right?

JK I answered all the questions that I saw that you asked me. I answered directly and honestly. If I missed one, please let me know.

JK,

Yes, your subtle references to my intellectual capabilities are EXTREMELY Christian of you. Just because I don't line up as a sheep in your field does not mean I am lacking brain cells, its quite the opposite. People like you all are the reason there are so many atheists in the world.

And who did this terrible thing? I'll have a word with them if it helps. Just point 'em out.

mk

I see quotes such as "she was perfectly healthy" etc.

Wow. Does nobody else on here know about the autopsy results? Not only was she blind (so the video that showed her watching a balloon was just stimuli-reaction) but half of her brain was liquified.

Megan,

As far as I know, blind people can be healthy people.

And if she was blind, then she wouldn't react (even with stimuli-reaction) to a balloon.

She was not on life support. She could recognize the people who loved her. And none of that matters anyway. She was alive. Her food and water was taken away from her. She slowly died.
She was murdered. Period.

If a person kept food and water from a dog for 14 days, he'd be arrested.

mk

Megan, In the context that was written in, I understand it to mean that she was able to function without the use of artificial life support. And she was! She wanted to live, if she hadn't, her body would have given up long before it was forcefully taken away from her.

All she required was food and water to survive, as has been reiterated time and time again.

from Bobby's article:
" an effort to dehumanize Terri, they repeatedly reported she was in a coma, brain dead, a "vegetable" and that the autopsy proved she was in a persistent vegetative state, all of which are patently false."

All of you ignore the fact that she had massive and irreversible damage done to all parts of her brain. People claim she was "healthy", which must be a joke, considering her brain function.

"She wanted to live, if she hadn't, her body would have given up long before it was forcefully taken away from her"
Wow... how illogical. That isn't how a person's body functions, if a body has the capacity to function, it will, whether or not a person "wants" to live. Schiavo's body had the capacity to function, I am not denying that, however, due to the irreversible brain damage there was no chance she could ever get any better. She would forever be bed-ridden, any action by her would be simple stimuli-response, etc.

She would forever be bed-ridden, any action by her would be simple stimuli-response, etc.

And of course, that alone makes her not worthy of life in the eyes of people who have no respect for life. Even though she has a family who loved her very much, and were willing to take care of her in this state to the natural end of her life, people seem perfectly willing to sit by and say, ah well she was going to be bedridden for her entire life anyway. It was a merciful act. (14 days, no food or water, dehydration, cracked lips, sunken eyes..yeah, that's mercy).

What about people in nursing homes who are bedridden? Should they all be euthanized too?

Bethany, do you want me to scratch "I must not tell lies" onto the back of my hand with a quill? Because I am looking forward to the new Harry Potter movie and I would love being able to go in such a dedicated costume.

A question I never received an answer on is....."Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?"

Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?......Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer's, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.

JK,

Huh?

MK

Bethany, do you want me to scratch "I must not tell lies" onto the back of my hand with a quill?

Hmm, might not be the worst idea you ever came up with. ;-) hehe

A question I never received an answer on is....."Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?"

If the person is only kept alive by being fed and given water, absolutely. That's just common sense. It's murder to kill someone like that.

Besides, there is always a chance they could come to...kind of like Christa Lilly did for 3 days, after being in a coma for 6 years. The doctors couldn't explain it! She talked, laughed, ate and had a great time for a while. So what that tells me is that even while in a coma, many times the people are "still there" even though they are "hidden" for a while. To kill the body still kills that person's spirit. I do not advocate killing an innocent person, even if they said they wished to die in certain situations, because I feel that people sometimes don't really know...they don't always know what's in store for them in the future. They also don't know for sure that they won't come out of a coma. It's always better to err on the side of life, rather than the side of death, in my opinion. ;)

Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?......Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer's, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.

I'm with MK...huh? What are you talking about?

Who could know what someone wants better than themselves?

I don't know...ask that to the people who try to commit suicide, then several years later THANK the person who saved them in the nick of time while their wrists were bleeding, or while they were having their stomachs pumped.

Megan, please read my column.

All of these mean comments are prejudiced. People have bought into this notion that we can decide when it's ok to kill somebody, but it's not up to us.

As for how we treat animals, we as a society employ judges to level the stronget punishment for abusing their family pets, and then we give these very same judges awards for starving the disabled - my sister - to death.

How warped things are in our country. We're killing the unborn, we're killing the elderly, we're killing the disabled, we're trying to ok it to kill ourselves by assisted suicide. Who else will there soon be to kill?

Don't forget killing Muslims, our country loves it when we kill Muslims.

JK,

You've either got to get off of the drugs, or on them. What in heavens name are you talking about?

mk

Advocating the death of a terrorist is not the same as advocating death for all muslims. Muslim does not automatically equal terrorist, even though many terrorists are muslim. You might need to check your facts before speaking.

So ...what does this have to do with killing innocent people?

I'm all for medicating the elderly, so they can live longer, healthier lives. To bad the government and prescription drug companies think otherwise.

The innocent Muslims that get caught in the crossfire in Iraq, all in the name of big oil.

In regards to what, MK?

Bethany,

I was just on your site...saw your drawings...oh my, I'm surrounded by extraordinary people today...first Bobby Schindler, and now you...

Humbled. Truly Humbled.
mk

In regards to what, MK?

I'm still trying to figure out what the heck this post meant:Where were the hoards of people advocating to string my grandmother along in her last days of suffering?......Oh wait, my grandmother had Alzheimer's, a less politically advantageous illness, especially in the eyes of conservatives.

And then you bring up killin' muslims out of nowhere.

Open a window and get some fresh air...

mk

Bethany,

I was just on your site...saw your drawings...oh my, I'm surrounded by extraordinary people today...first Bobby Schindler, and now you...

Humbled. Truly Humbled.
mk

MK thank you so much! That means a lot to me! :)

Jk, I agree...I really would like to understand where all these weird arguments are coming from. You're pulling up all kinds of off the wall topics that have nothing to do with Terri Shiavo at all.
??
What's the deal?

Bobby was talking about all the different types of people Americans like to kill, I was adding one he forgot to mention.

Well what was the deal with the comment about your grandmother?

JK asked ....."Do you advocate disregarding a DNR order simply because the family is not ready to let go?"

Did I miss something here, which is quite possible considering I have a 1 and 4 year old running around.

DNR - Do not resuscitate - right?

How is that anything like this case? A DNR is if a patient stops breathing or heart stops, basically the 'code blue'. Tery didn't code, she was breathing without machines, her heart was beating on its own. How does a DNR have anything to do with depriving someone of food and water?

DNR's are usually set by the patient via a living will or by the family. At least I think so.

Thank you for that info, Valerie. I actually didn't know that's what it stood for.

Valerie, the question that I asked was hypothetical, I just wanted Bethany's opinion on it, it had nothing to do with this exact case.

Bethany, my grandmother died in a strikingly similar way as Terri, but no one tried to keep her alive. Because advocating to find treatments and cures for diseases such as Alzheimers would require people to take a liberal point of view, and actually support science.

Yes, Terri Schiavo was indeed starved and dehydrated to death.

Below are some disturbing facts:

Terri was starved and dehydrated to death - whether she was denied a feeding tube or natural food or water does not matter. Terri was subject to an act that can't done to dog, a deathrow inmate or a terrorist. Starvation and dehydration (whether by removing a tube or natural) on it face is cruel.

Terri was not dying. No disease. No Cancer. She just needed help with food and water. Disabled - Yes. Dying - No.

There was nothing in writing - Just oral statements that had nothing to do with a feeding tube or living in PVS.

Michael Schiavo was conflicted in the following way:

At the time the decision was made (This is a key fundemental point (year 2000)):

Michael was living with and sleeping with another woman and provided no proof to his claims.

Michael was set to inherit $750,000.

Terri had no Legal counsel.

Terri had no GAL.

Another key important fundemental point - With those conflicts in mind - Neither Michael Schiavo or the Schindlers ever thought the case would last another 5 years. Michael has even written that he was suprised by the fact that the Schindler could appeal the 2000 trial decision.

I 'think' that is what it is...

Hey - I went on your site to look at your drawing. Gorgeous! You have a very wonderful gift. I'm so glad your husband encouraged you.

Why are you so touchy about me changing subjects?

This is an anti abortion blog and we are talking about Terri Shiavo. Ironic.

Bethany, my grandmother died in a strikingly similar way as Terri, but no one tried to keep her alive. Because advocating to find treatments and cures for diseases such as Alzheimers would require people to take a liberal point of view, and actually support science.

While I am very sorry for the loss of your grandmother, embryonic stem cells have cured no one of anything , ever. To put faith in something like that is quite sad, when there is much more promise in Adult Stem Cells.

Adult stem cells seem to be doing very well helping people live longer lives! There are over 70 cures from using adult stem cells...none from Embryonic cells...and the only thing they have done is create huge tumors in rats.

So it is definitely not the fault of the pro life advocates that your grandmother did not live a longer life, JK.

I 'think' that is what it is...

Hey - I went on your site to look at your drawing. Gorgeous! You have a very wonderful gift. I'm so glad your husband encouraged you.

Valerie, thanks so much, you are very kind! :)

James, thank you for your post.

Why are you so touchy about me changing subjects?

This is an anti abortion blog and we are talking about Terri Shiavo. Ironic.

Wrong again...this is a pro-life blog. Unborn babies aren't the only people we pro-lifers are concerned with.

umm.....10 cures, 70 is the party line.

If you care about life then discussing the Iraq war is right on point, many more innocent Americans and Iraqis die than terrorists. You should care about them.

I am tired of these circular debates. Goodbye!

umm.....10 cures, 70 is the party line.

Better than zero? Yes or no?

I am tired of these circular debates. Goodbye!

Sniff? :-(

It's mind-boggling how Bethany and others refuse to accept the results of the autopsy/medical board.

The examiners were there. They saw what was left of Terry's brain. It was less than half the size it should have been for a woman her age/size, and what *was* there was damaged beyond repair. The brain stem was about the only thing not completely damaged beyond repair, and that is what controls basic body functions. There was no more "Terry" after that massive brain damage occurred.

It's also phenomenal to me that you people think it isn't playing God to keep people alive. If God decides it's your time to go, who are you to fight with Him about it? You must be terrified that you won't go to Heaven when you die if you are brazen enough to reject God's call.

It's also phenomenal to me that you people think it isn't playing God to keep people alive. If God decides it's your time to go, who are you to fight with Him about it? You must be terrified that you won't go to Heaven when you die if you are brazen enough to reject God's call.

If you think feeding someone to sustain them is playing God, you are just completely confused.

Oh but it's just the people you don't personally see value in.. that's right.

The only thing keeping Terri alive was food and water, just like everyone else, for 14 years.

And her family took care of her and loved her that whole time. You may not like it, but she was a living human being who deserved a dignified life, and a natural death, not death by starvation.

Scoff all you wish. She was alive, she was a person, she was loved, she had worth. She did not deserve to be starved to death.

You know, it's really amazing to me that the very people who said "You pro-lifers don't care about women or anyone other than a fetus", are the same people who are condeming myself and others for not wanting a full grown woman to die unjustly.

Talk about irony.

What do you mean "unjustly", Bethany? If anything, pulling the plug did Terri a favor.

There was no "pulling the plug", Justin. They removed her source of food and water.

They DID pull a proverbial plug. The tube that sent food into her stomach.

Not the same.

Sounds the same to me. It was her life support system, and when it was removed, she died. Explain the difference.

Justin, It was her life support system in the same sense that your dinner is your life support system.

If someone took food and water out of your life, you'd die in 14 (or possibly less) days too, most likely.

Speaking of dinner, I need to start cooking something for tonight. Have a good evening. :)

Below are distrubing verfiable facts of the Schiavo case.

1. Michael Schiavo has given 3 separate and conflicting accounts of Terri's collapse. Terri's collapse remains unsolved to this day. No heart attack. No Eating disorder. In fact, Michael accounts of what happen that night changed almost by the hour.

2. Michael had the vet euthanize Terri's 2 beloved cats. He also melted down her wedding rings.

3. Terri's was locked away in hospice for nearly 3 years. Any and all attempts to allow to leave her room were denied. This included attending social functions such as a bird show, attend church services, and to even go outside to feel and enjoy the sun. Terri could leave her room. She just needed a wheelchair which Michael refused to provide.

4. Court hearings were actually conducted to get permission to raise the blinds in Terri's room.

5. Michael refused to mention Terri in both of his parent's obits. Instead he mentioned Jodi as his fiancee.

6. Terri felt pain. Numerous Numerous testimonies and medical documentation bear this fact.

"Justin, It was her life support system in the same sense that your dinner is your life support system."

Uh, nice try. I'm fully conscious and eat dinner at will. Terry had to be fed through her STOMACH. Try again.

"If someone took food and water out of your life, you'd die in 14 (or possibly less) days too, most likely. "

Yeah, but I'm not confined to my bed, incapable of movement or thought. Nice try.

"2. Michael had the vet euthanize Terri's 2 beloved cats. He also melted down her wedding rings."

That's bad, but I fail to see how it's relevant to anything.

"This included attending social functions such as a bird show, attend church services, and to even go outside to feel and enjoy the sun. Terri could leave her room. She just needed a wheelchair which Michael refused to provide."

Are you retarded? HER BRAIN DIDN'T work. She wouldn't have been able to perceive anything, and needed to remain in bed. Oh, and she was blind, too.

"4. Court hearings were actually conducted to get permission to raise the blinds in Terri's room."

I fail to see the relevance to anything.

"5. Michael refused to mention Terri in both of his parent's obits. Instead he mentioned Jodi as his fiancee."

So?

"6. Terri felt pain. Numerous Numerous testimonies and medical documentation bear this fact."

So?

Justin -

One of the greatest minds of our times, Stephen Hawkings, should not be alive according to your reasoning.

He is incapable of movement. He needs to be fed because he cannot feed himself. He cannot talk without the help of a computer.

As a matter of fact, if it wasn't for the vast scientific advances we would have considered him to be just like Terri.

People who are not perfect have the right to live. She was not perfect, but she was still able to give love to the people who were there for her.

Starving and Dehydrating someone to death regardless of the person's condition (not dying) and whether the practice is done by the removal of feeding tube or by natural means is a cruel inhumane process ON ITS FACE.

When I say ON IT FACE, I mean the whole sense of it.

Starvation and Dehydration is something that we can't do to a dog, a deathrow imate or terrorists.

And yet the practice of starvation and dehydration was done to Terri.

The fact that feeding tube was simply removed changes little.

Terri was denied food and water.

Terri's death was caused by starvation and dehydration.

It should also be noted that the provision of food and water is a basic humanitarian right.

Children in other countries die from lack of food and water.

Billions of dollars are sent each year to give these children food and water.

The provision of food and water is also a basic need under Maslow's hiarchitory of Needs just like shelter.

So ON THE FACE OF IT, starvation and dehydration whether it be by removal of a feeding tube or by natural means is a inhumane process.

Terri's was subjected to this inhumane process.

Terri was not dying and would have lived another 10 years.

Terri was deprived of the basic humanitarian right to food and water (feeding tube or natural means).

This is not the same as witholding a ventilator or kidney dialysis as those are true life support and person's death are caused by organ failure.

In addition, starvation and dehydration is rather prolonged process as we have seen.

Terri death by a removal of feeding tube fell under the preumbra of starvation and dehydration, an act that is cruel and inhumane.

On a final note, There is nothing in the legal record to indicate that Terri ever wanted a feeding tube removed.

The decision was made on a "Quality of Life" accessment in which court took Terri statments and based on her quality of life assumed that she would not want a feeding tube.

The veracity of Terri's wishes never indicated she didn't want a feeding tube or to be starved and dehydrated to death.

Why Terri's death was a form of Euthansia:

Euthanasia Expert Shows Reasons Terri's Death was Euthanasia rather t