Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (105012)	3/20/2005 4:25:55 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) of 793838

Karen...Your comment ....Or are you uncomfortable with the notion of that person's right to be allowed to die, in general? .... is the nub of the question for me. If a person truly wants to die, then IMO they should be given that right. The problem here is that not only did Terri not have a written directive, but that her "guardian" husband, decided on no more therapy even after winning the lawsuit and having well over $1,000,000 to be able to help with therapy for Terri. Would she have had enough mental capacity to be able to tell people outloud and in her own words, what she wanted to do? Could she ever have had any kind of life had she had that therapy? Why didn't he divorce Terri? He continued on with his life on one hand, and yet, didn't. Why not? We will never know. Michael has made sure of that.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next