The Terri Schiavo PAC

[KenpoEMT]

Apparently, the deceased Terri Schiavo's husband, Michael Schiavo, has created a Political Action Committee.
Wonderful. There's another PAC in town.
Did anyone see the video footage of Terri responding to her family? Whatever condition she was in, she wasn't a vegetable.
Here's a link to the noble new PAC:
http://www.terripac.com/who.html

Michael Schiavo, whose 15 year struggle to grant his wife’s end-of-life wishes triggered unprecedented government intrusion and political grandstanding by political leaders from the Florida Legislature to President George W. Bush, today announced he has formed TerriPAC - a national political committee.

I totally support the concept of Advance Directives; however, wasn't it established that Terri did not have one? His wife didn't have documented end-of-life wishes.
...and a judge ordered her death.

Well, what do you think?

 

[Ceicei]

Well, we've gone through that in this thread, http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22695&highlight=Schiavo. We'll see if anyone is up for a second round.

- Ceicei

 

[michaeledward]

Did anyone see the video footage of Terri responding to her family? Whatever condition she was in, she wasn't a vegetable.

According to the autopsy, her brain had liquified. She wasn't going to be playing chess anytime soon.

...and a judge ordered her death.

Well, what do you think?

Actually, the judge confirmed that her husband had legal right to make a decision for his wife, rather than her parents.

Seems to me that book talks about a woman leaving her home to become one with her husband .... unless there are fundamentalists close by to patronize.

 

[KenpoEMT]

According to the autopsy, her brain had liquified. She wasn't going to be playing chess anytime soon.

Ick.

Actually, the judge confirmed that her husband had legal right to make a decision for his wife, rather than her parents.

I disagree with the judges decision. The family wished to care for her.

Seems to me that book talks about a woman leaving her home to become one with her husband .... unless there are fundamentalists close by to patronize.

What book??? I'm not quite following this last part.

Anyway, this was actually supposed to be about the Political Action Committee that Michael Schiavo founded.
The executive branch felt so strongly that the judicial branch had overstepped it's boundries that they moved in and attempted to do something to protect a helpless woman.
This bothers Mr. Schiavo?
If his PAC gains momentum within the realms of elected power, how then are we to protect ourselves from a judiciary that feels comfortable sentencing innocent people to death?

 

[michaeledward]

The book to which I refer is the Bible. ...

A woman shall leave her family to be with her husband, and the two shall be as one. Genesis 2:24

What 'the family' wished is irrelevant. According to the laws within the United States, the husband speaks for the incapacitated wife.



The branch of government that overstep bounds was the Federal Congress. A portion of the House of Representatives voted to take the law out of the Florida Courts and make the issue a Federal issue. (174 Representatives had the good sense to stay home and not return for the vote) Then, the Chief Executive of the United States cut short his vacation to fly from one of his 365 days at his Ranch, being Presidential by clearing brush, to sign a bill into law in the middle of the night.


The Judiciary did not sentence this woman to die. The Judiciary claimed as fact, that Ms. Schiavo did not wish extrodinary measures to prolong her life and granted her husband permission to have the feeding tube removed.

Please stop mis-stating what the Judges ruled in these cases.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Please stop mis-stating what the Judges ruled in these cases.

I don't think that I mis-stated anything, and I'm not quite sure why you are quoting the bible to me. I don't care about your religion, sorry. You are free to believe as you wish; however, there is a time and a place for religiosity. I don't know what bearing an ancient religious text has on modern legal decisions... I don't think that I'm going to change my opinions based on what either a judge says or a religious text says.

Do we really need a PAC for this?

 

[Marginal]

Do we really need a PAC for this?

Given that some people still think it's humane to force a corpse to breathe... YES. Given that some people think that they're doing other people a favor by strapping them to machines against their will so that they'll live a few extra pain wracked, meaninless days, months or years.... Double yes.

 

[michaeledward]

I don't think that I mis-stated anything, and I'm not quite sure why you are quoting the bible to me. I don't care about your religion, sorry. You are free to believe as you wish; however, there is a time and a place for religiosity. I don't know what bearing an ancient religious text has on modern legal decisions... I don't think that I'm going to change my opinions based on what either a judge says or a religious text says.

Do we really need a PAC for this?

I am an athiest.

The bible reference was used because it parallels our legal system.
The husband has authority.
The mother and father's opinions have no legal weight.

And, perhaps having access to the actual legal documents you are misrepresenting would be helpful.

http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/



If legislators can't stay out of difficult family decisions because they need to appeal to a vocal minority of the public, yes, we do need a Political Action Committee.

 

[KenpoEMT]

I am not representing nor misrepresenting anything.

Am I not entitled to an opinion of an event? Our opinions differ, so what?

No judge is infallible, and I am not required to accept any judicial ruling hook, line, and sinker.

I saw the videos of Ms. Schiavo responding to her family. She was not a corpse.

The judge was wrong.


A PAC is not required. The DNC is doing a fine job. If you would like, you can vist Ms. Schiavo's grave and see for yourself.

 

[Marginal]

I saw the videos of Ms. Schiavo responding to her family. She was not a corpse. The judge was wrong.

The autopsy proves otherwise. Also demonstrates why the parents needed to cull 12 hours of footage to give the illusion that she was responsive in that tape. Frist's response to the autopsy ought to tell you that if nothing else. "I never made a diagnosis after watching that tape." Flip-flopping at its finest. (Guess he forgot that he was shown on C-Span stating "as a medical doctor" that the tape was proof that Terri was not in a PVS.)

A PAC is not required. The DNC is doing a fine job. If you would like, you can vist Ms. Schiavo's grave and see for yourself.

She has her golden PSP and her Keanu Reeves statue now. I don't see the problem. Mercy won over political grandstanding. That's worth a lot more than one person's torment.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Mercy won over political grandstanding

For god's sake, don't have mercy on ME, Marginal!! :lol:


Unresponsive patients are truely unresponsive. They don't open their eyes; they don't try to sit up; they don't try to communicate. So what if it took 12 hours of filming?

NOW, she is really unresponsive.

 

[Marginal]

Her eyes randomly tracked round and she randomly emitted moans regardless of who was in the room, or what was happening around her. It's understandable the parents would want to see their daughter as responsive, so they did. Kids do it with teddy bears, shadows, etc all the time. Doesn't mean that Teddy Ruxpin really is alive, or that the Bogie man is really hiding in their closet.

Regardless, she was classified as being in a persistent vegetative state, not a coma.

 

[KenpoEMT]

she was classified as being in a persistent vegetative state, not a coma.

We all know that mistakes are NEVER made.

This circular argument could go on for quite awhile.

Oh well, what's done is done. This is the very reason why I support advance directives. They clear up the emotional haze which surrounds tragedy.

I wonder if Mr. shiavo is going to wiggle his way into political office.

Anyway, a PAC over this issue is just a waste of money and time. Laws are in place. If they need to be changed then we need to change our representatives.

 

[Marginal]

For god's sake, don't have mercy on ME, Marginal!!

They're gonna have to change a whole host of laws before I'm ever going to end up in a position to pull your plug.

Regardless of the furor over Terri, I'll never feel that I'm doing anyone a favor by forcing them to live long after their body has quit. The quality of a life lived is more important than length. So really, the feeling's mutual. I wouldn't want someone with a sanctity of life issue chaining me to a few extra months of terrible pain, or a decade of staring at the ceiling. Medical costs aside, it also exacts a huge emotional toll.

This isn't a casual case of "Hey! You're looking obese! Die fatty!" This is dead without prolonged, permant medical intervention and a dismal quality of life.

 

[KenpoEMT]

They're gonna have to change a whole host of laws before I'm ever going to end up in a position to pull your plug.

wheew *wipes sweat off brow* :lol:

Regardless of the furor over Terri, I'll never feel that I'm doing anyone a favor by forcing them to live long after their body has quit. The quality of a life lived is more important than length. So really, the feeling's mutual. I wouldn't want someone with a sanctity of life issue chaining me to a few extra months of terrible pain, or a decade of staring at the ceiling. Medical costs aside, it also exacts a huge emotional toll.

I totally agree. It's not so much a "sanctity of life" issue for me as it is an issue of, "gee, did they really consider every option?" It's an issue of, "The executive and judicial branches need to stay the hell away from my hospital bed!!" I don't want anyone playing politics with my plug, and I don't think this PAC is really going to help.

This isn't a casual case of "Hey! You're looking obese! Die fatty!" This is dead without prolonged, permant medical intervention and a dismal quality of life.

Yep, in an instance like that, I agree. I'm just not convinced that Schiavo was in that condition, that's all.

Personally, I think that every time you visit your doctor or are taken to the ER you should have to sign an Advance Directive in addition to the hundred or so other papers you have to sign.

 

[Marginal]

Personally, I think that every time you visit your doctor or are taken to the ER you should have to sign an Advance Directive in addition to the hundred or so other papers you have to sign.

Couldn't hurt, though I doubt that it'd made any difference.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I am an athiest.

The bible reference was used because it parallels our legal system.
The husband has authority.
The mother and father's opinions have no legal weight.

And, perhaps having access to the actual legal documents you are misrepresenting would be helpful.

http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/lit/schiavo/



If legislators can't stay out of difficult family decisions because they need to appeal to a vocal minority of the public, yes, we do need a Political Action Committee.

Selective uses of the bible...interesting. I'm sure in another debate you'd refute that the bible parallels the legal system, but that's another issue.


Personally, it wasn't the fact that it had been decided to let Terry Shiavo die, it was the tool of death. If we executed an inmate by starvation, or an animal for that matter, we'd hear all kinds of accusations of crimes against humanity echoing all over the world. Yet, starve a brain-damaged woman, and it's perfectly acceptable...that's an interesting dichotomy. We can torture in mercy, but not as punishment? I guess it isn't what you do, it's what your intent is. :shrug:

 

[michaeledward]

Selective uses of the bible...interesting. I'm sure in another debate you'd refute that the bible parallels the legal system, but that's another issue.

The people fighting to pro-long the forced feeding of Ms. Schaivo tended to be religious fundamentalists. As this is the defense camp, I used the idea from their framework to a) strengthen my position and b) point out their hypocrisy.

The bible is, in many cases, an excellent guidepost for living in community. Our country is a nation of laws (some of the time anyway), so we do not use scripture as the legal framework, even if we sometimes take our cues from it.

How much I would refute the use of the bible would depend on the nature of the argument.

 

[michaeledward]

I am not representing nor misrepresenting anything.

Am I not entitled to an opinion of an event? Our opinions differ, so what?

No judge is infallible, and I am not required to accept any judicial ruling hook, line, and sinker.

I saw the videos of Ms. Schiavo responding to her family. She was not a corpse.

The judge was wrong.


A PAC is not required. The DNC is doing a fine job. If you would like, you can vist Ms. Schiavo's grave and see for yourself.

JUDGES:There was more than a single judge who ruled on this issue.

Had you followed that findlaw link I submitted, you would have found the following:

"The Trial Court found by clear and convincing evidence that Theresa Schiavo was in a persistent vegitative state and that Theresa would elect to cease life-prolonging procedures if she were competent to make her own decision."

An appellate court agreed with this finding.

The Florida Supreme Court: Judge Wells, Judge Anstead, Judge Lewis, Judge Quince, Judge Cantero, and Judge Bell ruled that the trial court made the correct assessment, and that the Florida Senate and Florida Governor overstepped their roles by writing Terri's Law.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals first had three judges review the case. Two of the three judges, Judge Carnes, and Judge Hull, ruled against re-inserting the feeding tube.

The complete 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a hearing in the case. Chief Judge Edmondson, Judge Tjoflat, Judge Anderson, Judge Birch, Judge Dubina, Judge Black, Judge Carnes, Judge Barkett, Judge Hull, Judge Marcus, Judge Wilson, and Judge Prior heard an appeal.

Judge Tjoflat and Judge Wilson ruled in favor of 'the family' by saying there is reason to hear the case.

Justice Kennedy, from the Supreme Court of the United States, denied an application to review the case before the Supreme Court.


You are entitled to your opinion.

In this instance, the judges, I think, have a great deal more credibility in their opinions and in their rulings.

 

[Phoenix44]

1. TerriPAC is not specifically about right to die issues. It's to support candidates who favor defending personal and family privacy from interference for political gain.

2. Anyone who thinks they can make a diagnosis of a complex neurological problem by watching a video is about as reliable a doctor as Bill Frist--and even Frist backed off after he knew the autopsy report. And at least Frist has a medical license.