The Schiavo issue

[Nephythys]

How is it you need to instruct me to not lump you in with people you may not agree with, but you can figure out that I am not calling you specifically bat**** insane?

Come on......why are peole so eager to assume they are being personally attacked.

As to the question about the courts I don't know why that is- since I don't know all the facts.

I hope this ends soon-

(my comment was also not hyperbole- I was not exaggerating. Check the attitudes about the death penalty- where the process is so deeply flawed as to not be trusted- yet this is? That is not hyperbole- it's a contradiction)

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

MBC- with all due respect you don't know all the facts either- there are plenty of things that are being said about the husband, and even if some is not true, some is bound to be exactly that- true. You can't just assume that he is some saint- he has acted as anything but. I don't see how you can just assume he is sincerely acting out of concern to her or for her so-called wishes.

Terry Shiavo's parents have had every opportunity to make their case. They have failed in every court they have been in. They never even called that nurse in their defense and I can only assume it is because she is not credible. The arguments about Michael Shiavo just being in this for the money don't stand up to scrutiny either. He has been offered at least 1 million dollars, and some say even 20 million, to relinquish his rights to make decisions for his wife. He has refused. Why do you think that is?

All we have is a bunch of unsubstantiated hearsay that has tried to demonize him. I don't assume he is a saint, but I see someone who has tried for 20 years to uphold his wife's wishes. And I am interested in why you persist in calling them her "so-called" wishes. It is not just Michael's word. It was backed up by at least 4 other people in court. And EVERY court and EVERY judge has reached the same conclusion. Michael Shiavo has the right to make this decision for his wife. That is the law and it should be followed.

This is not a decision that should be made by Washington. That goes against everything conservatives are supposed to believe in. 70% of the population feels that they should stay the hell out of it because it isn't the governments role.

I can't help but feel that your opinion is 99% emotion and 1% facts and those facts weren't strong enough to sway any court this has been tried in. Yes, it is very sad that this woman is going to die. I do feel for her parents. They are doing what they are doing out of the love for their daughter. I get that. But they are not valuing their daughters wishes and that is wrong. There is not one doctor out there (not on the parents payroll) who sees any hope of recovery here. Let this poor woman go and stop using her for political purposes.

[scaeagles]

I think it is done. The Supreme court will not issue an order - news just in.

[Nephythys]

It's time to let it go- as horrible as it is, as creepy as the husband is, it is just time to let it go.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

Terry Shiavo's parents have had every opportunity to make their case. They have failed in every court they have been in. They never even called that nurse in their defense and I can only assume it is because she is not credible. The arguments about Michael Shiavo just being in this for the money don't stand up to scrutiny either. He has been offered at least 1 million dollars, and some say even 20 million, to relinquish his rights to make decisions for his wife. He has refused. Why do you think that is?

All we have is a bunch of unsubstantiated hearsay that has tried to demonize him. I don't assume he is a saint, but I see someone who has tried for 20 years to uphold his wife's wishes. And I am interested in why you persist in calling them her "so-called" wishes. It is not just Michael's word. It was backed up by at least 4 other people in court. And EVERY court and EVERY judge has reached the same conclusion. Michael Shiavo has the right to make this decision for his wife. That is the law and it should be followed.

This is not a decision that should be made by Washington. That goes against everything conservatives are supposed to believe in. 70% of the population feels that they should stay the hell out of it because it isn't the governments role.

I can't help but feel that your opinion is 99% emotion and 1% facts and those facts weren't strong enough to sway any court this has been tried in. Yes, it is very sad that this woman is going to die. I do feel for her parents. They are doing what they are doing out of the love for their daughter. I get that. But they are not valuing their daughters wishes and that is wrong. There is not one doctor out there (not on the parents payroll) who sees any hope of recovery here. Let this poor woman go and stop using her for political purposes.

I don't give a rats ass about the politics. As I said before I think the gov't should have stayed out of it. Don't make the assumption that I want to have the gov't making the decisions, I never said I did.

It took him something like SEVEN years to start fighting to have this happen- If I feel something akin to disgust and distrust, oh well. If this was truly her wish, then why in the world did he drag it out this long?

At this point it needs to be over-

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

(my comment was also not hyperbole- I was not exaggerating. Check the attitudes about the death penalty- where the process is so deeply flawed as to not be trusted- yet this is? That is not hyperbole- it's a contradiction)

The position, at least my position, is that even if the justice system was 99.9% accurate with regards to convictions, the margin of error is still too high and the execution of one innocent person is one too many.

You have spoken out in this thread against the court ordered execution of innocents. Yet, in the Scott Peterson thread, you took the position that if Peterson is actually innocent, then oh well, God will sort it out.

I do not look at your seemingly conflicting stances as being hypocritical. I see them for what they are: Two different opinions on two different subjects.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by SacTown Chronic

The position, at least my position, is that even if the justice system was 99.9% accurate with regards to convictions, the margin of error is still too high and the execution of one innocent person is one too many.

You have spoken out in this thread against the court ordered execution of innocents. Yet, in the Scott Peterson thread, you took the position that if Peterson is actually innocent, then oh well, God will sort it out.

I do not look at your seemingly conflicting stances as being hypocritical. I see them for what they are: Two different opinions on two different subjects.

-so you are saying Terri's death is a court ordered execution? I said it was IF the story of her speaking against the ruling was true- the post needs to be taken in context.

If Peterson is guilty, as he was found to be, then I do not object to the death penalty. If he were to get a reversal, but he was in fact guilty, then God can certainly sort it out. If he is innocent, same thing. But I trust the trial process- many others do not.

I just think the contrast is amazing- on on hand you have people against the death penalty on the chance that the jury/court find wrongly- yet there seems to be no quibble when the court decides on this case. In this case they are the grand arbiters saving Terri by allowing Michael to let her live or die and they seem to be viewed in this case as infallible. In death penalty cases they are flawed and too quick to deal death to a possibly innocent person. I don't see how you can trust them in one and not the other- but that's me.

[SacTown Chronic]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

-so you are saying Terri's death is a court ordered execution?

Not at all.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by SacTown Chronic

Not at all.

I didn't think so- but you took my post out of context by removing the linked info I posted with it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

I just think the contrast is amazing- on on hand you have people against the death penalty on the chance that the jury/court find wrongly- yet there seems to be no quibble when the court decides on this case.

On the one hand you have the courts upholding the rights of an individual to make a personal decission he has the legal right to make as next-of-kin, on the other you have the state ordering and carrying out an execution. The Schiavo case is a case of deciding that the government should stay the hell out of it, death penalty is a case of government taking final action that I feel they have no right to take.