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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (31700)	4/5/2005 3:43:46 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Thanks. I understand that position. I'm not saying either side is right or wrong.....just that in weighing a difficult balance, I think coming down in favor of preserving Terri's life would have been better.....each option constitutes a very difficult choice. J.

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (31700)	4/5/2005 6:55:48 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

The problem with your article is it does not present a factually accurate picture of the issues. ...We all know the story now. A raft of doctors said over the years that Terri's reactions were purely reflexive, that she would not recover.... Four of six neurologists testified that Terri was PVS. Two were in disagreement. This was done without the aid of the best possible tests (Michael refused to allow those tests). Add to it that the error rate in accurately diagnosing PVS is greater than 40%. ....The courts ruled over and over again that her husband had the right to withdraw a feeding tube in deference to what he said were the expressed wishes of his wife..... That is completely false. The findings of fact happened only once. Every single appeal or review did not consider or rule on the findings of fact. They ruled on the process of the original court case & found that the process was proper. ....Congress passed legislation, spitting in the face of the courts—as well as states' rights and the separation of powers—but even the last-ditch federal jurists had the strength to uphold the law..... That is completely false. The Legislative branch of the gov't passed a law as is their right under the Constitution (for a de novo review - a fresh review of the facts). The President signed the law into effect as is his Constitutional authority (either veto or sign laws into effect. The Judicial branch ignored the law in violation of the Constitution. The Judicial branch did not perform a de novo review, nor did they rule the law unconstitutional. They clearly acted improperly & outside of our Constitution. The rest of this article is an impassioned plea for the right to die. It ignores the legal aspect of Terri's case where "clear & convincing evidence" was required to be established that Terri's wishes would have been to remove the feeding tube. If not, the state MUST err on the side of life. IMO, The legal aspect of this case is about due process & the laws in effect when this case took place. It is not about what we would do if it were us in Terri Schaivo's shoes. And that is where all too many of us have taken this case.

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (31700)	4/5/2005 7:10:20 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Holly, this isn't directed at you. It is however, my observation of a large number of folks who have taken inflexible stands on this issue. The real problem with the Terri Schiavo case is just like liberal bias in the MSM. Folks are lining up on which ever side they have chosen. They are selectively picking only those facts that support their POV & ignoring everything that runs counter to their now entrenched POV. They are blithely ignoring what actually happened in Terri Schiavo's case & the laws that were in effect that had to be followed. It has become about what people want rather than a genuine exploration of what actually happened; whether or not that process failed Terri Schiavo, whether the process needs to be changed so that every individual's rights are properly protected & perhaps that we might be starting down a slippery slope that opens the door to allowing other less than competent people to be euthanized. Instead, the discussion for many folks has morphed into projecting their own personal desires onto Terri &/or Michael Schiavo. ET AL. And like the liberal MSM, many of the folks who wanted the feeding tube pulled are acting emotionally rather than rationally. They are attacking Congress, the President & anyone who disagrees with them despite credible evidence to support their opinions. JMHO