Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aladin who wrote (105585)	3/23/2005 1:06:12 PM
From: Oral Roberts	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793721

And now what is happening is hysterics. Now it's common knowledge that he beat her. No proof but it's common knowledge. For that matter he may have actually caused her condition. And if he doesn't allow an autopsy after she dies that will be the final nail in his coffin. The knowledge is common today but totally unknown to insurance companies and investigators of the time who settled. Amazing. An SI hiatus is in order for this dood because I'm getting way to whacked out over this deal and it's the main topic on most threads.

To: aladin who wrote (105585)	3/23/2005 1:19:11 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793721

Those of us who view life as sacred - should fight that law and permit and advise families to look at DNR's appropriately when advised of their options by their doctors. Do I correctly infer that you are drawing a bright line between the DNR, which is appropriate, and the withdrawal of a feeding tube, which is not? If so, can you clarify for me your basis for that distinction? Since you and I come at it from different perspectives--I support assisted suicide--I just want to get a better grasp of your thinking. EDIT: It looks like you were doing the clarifying as I was posting. Thanks.