A Zogby Poll just released indicates that Americans oppose the forced starvation of people in Terri Schiavo’s condition prior to the removal of her feeding tube. These results, taken by one of the nation’s most respected pollsters, show opposite results to opinion polls taken by many television networks while Terri Schiavo lay dying from forced dehydration in a Florida hospice last month.
When asked, “If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water?” only 7% responded that they should while a whopping 80.3% said they should not.
Americans responded with an overwhelming 73.5% that it is proper for the federal government to intervene when basic civil rights are being denied, while only 18.7% felt such intervention was improper.
Americans also disagreed by a 57.1% majority that that hearsay should be allowed as evidence in the case of determining if a feeding tube should be removed, while 31% agreed hearsay should be allowed. In the case of Terri Schiavo, there was no written directive, and the evidence of her wishes not to be kept alive by tubes was based on hearsay and was hotly disputed by the family.
Much controversy in the Schiavo case swirled around the role of the husband in making life and death decisions for his wife. Zogby asked the following question of over 1,000 Americans in a scientific poll: “Michael Schiavo has had a girlfriend for 10 years and has two children with her. Considering this, do you agree or disagree that Michael Schiavo should turn guardianship of Terri over to her parents?”
Given this information, 56.2% agreed that guardianship should have passed to Terri?s parents, while only 35.1% believed that Michael should have retained guardianship.
“These poll results show that previous polls were skewered in the way that questions were asked in order to produce a desired response. But when Americans have the full story, they overwhelmingly disagree with forced dehydration and starvation,” said Operation Rescue president Troy Newman, who helped commission the poll. “The pro-euthanasia crowd wants us to believe Americans support this kind of brutal killing of innocent people, but this poll proves that is just not true. Americans support a Culture of Life, not a Culture of Death.”
I am so upset that a thorough review of suspicions regarding Michael Schiavo never transpired. The reason her death was public and people were watching is because they felt she was being murdered. How Michael got to get rid of the evidence (cremation) after an autopsy is beyond me. I think Florida doesn’t have a leader at the helm, sorry to say. It is sickening.
How can the media continue to act in such a biased way?
I agree…and what’s so tragic with what happened to Terri was that at 9-11, while that was a huge tragedy, at least our government took leadership and responded appropriately, and the media was calling it for what it was. It has all seemed very surreal, the past few weeks with this first legalized murder in Florida, and the media for the most part acting as if it was the most normal and acceptable thing in the world. I fear much more now than I did after the terror attacks, and the grief is overwhelming…so sad. May God help our country.
Since you all were there. Tell me, what Terri Schiavo told Michael Schiavo that she wanted if she was ever in that condition. Since you all obviously know more than every court that heard the evidence, fill me in.
tryanhas, that there could be so much stupidity in such a short post boggles the mind. This whole case was about an agenda, not about evidence. For one – in no other court case has hearsay been declared “evidence”. But the heart of the matter is that NO ONE should EVER be murdered by starvation and dehydration. And it is still murder, whether they “request” it or not. God never tolerates murder – self inflicted or otherwise – and neither should we.
The ignorance of the arguments of the pro-death people continually amazes me. The truth of the matter is that only ONE court ever heard the arguments of what Terri’s wishes were – the Pinellas County District Court under George Greer. He (having his own adgenda, as evidences throughout his previous rulings on similar matters), and he alone, ignored the Schindler’s and Terri’s friends’ testimony. He was the only judge that EVER ruled on this hotly contested issue. NO OTHER JUDGE EVER REVIEWED HIS DECISION. All the appeals courts & district courts did was to look at the PROCEDURAL PROCESS of the court record – no the evidence!!!!!!! Terri’s wishes will never be known, but many people have seen a clear biased adgenda in Greer’s rulings on the guardianship issue and Terri’s life wishes. WHEN ARE YOU PRO-DEATH MORONS EVER GOING TO START USING YOUR BRAINS – OR SHOULD WE JUST START PULLING THE PLUGS ON YOU (SINCE YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY BRAIN-DEAD AND CAN’T THINK FOR YOURSELVES)??????
Since you all were there. Tell me, what Terri Schiavo told Michael Schiavo that she wanted if she was ever in that condition. Since you all obviously know more than every court that heard the evidence, fill me in.
Posted by: tryanhas at April 7, 2005 09:40 AM
In 2003, Florida had 3 executions, I do believe those were all legalized murders handed down by court orders before Terri died.
gpantz
i know that facts are troublesome things, and the following (a letter to the editor i submitted)will probably give you a headache, but perhaps your thought process will be engaged (there’s a first time for everything).
regarding the terri schiavo case, it’s interesting to me that the same
crybabies who defend every convicted killer who’s been sentenced to death, under
the guise that killing them is inhumane, had nothing to say about an innocent
woman who was starved to death. i guess if terri had murdered a few people, and
the state had ordered her starved to death, then we’d have some outrage from the
anti-death penalty crowd. but no, she was just a disabled person who needed
care, so the usually loud and obnoxious liberals were silent. or even worse,
these phonies supported the husband’s side.
myself, i believe in the death penalty, but only for people who’ve been tried
by a jury of their peers, convicted, and sentenced to die. i don’t support
selfish men starving their disabled wives to death. but i do have an interesting proposal. since the ACLU and certain judges have
decided that a man can legally deny his wife food and water, in effect, starving
her to death, then i propose that we handle all death row cases in this manner.
in other words, when the people on death row have exhausted their appeals,
let’s just cut off all food and water to them. since pro-euthanasia advocates
like george felos claim that denial of food and water is a painless, even
‘peaceful’ and ‘euphoric’ way to go, then it can’t possibly be cruel and unusual
punishment. no more electrocution,
lethal injections, firing squads, or hangings. just stop feeding them and
giving them water.
michael schiavo was allowed to starve his wife to death, and the
bleeding heart liberals who have so much concern for lab animals and snail
darters, had nothing to say in opposition. so i say we’ve got the green light
to go ahead and start killing death row inmates this way also.
—
“Will you decide what men shall live and what men shall die? It may be in
the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions
like this poor man’s child. O God! to hear the insect on the leaf pronouncing
on the too much life among his hungry
brothers in the dust!” (Charles Dickens
So its okay to kill some people? I only wish to understand your position. if so, what circumstances justify it? who has the right to say who lives and who dies?
Reply to all who think she died peacefully:
If the public is comfortable with a swamp-judge mandating an innocent non-terminal disabled woman to die of starvation/dehydration and those in favor argue that it is a peaceful way to die, we should apply the same criteria to other situations. Veterinarians who deal daily with end-of-life for dogs and kitties will warehouse injured or sick animals in cages in the back-room and withhold water and food until they expire. Animal Control will follow suit and starve homeless dogs and cats. Those animals who were not chosen for adoption will be disposed of the same way. That will save the cost of lethal injections. All the states who have statutes against cruelty to animals can just nullify those silly laws. In the criminal justice system, those condemned to die to pay for their crimes are given the choice of lethal injection or electrocution. But dehydration/starvation has been described as euphoric “drifting away” to death. Death row inmates would choose it, wouldn’t they? If it’s good for her then it’s good for them. I can’t imagine anyone objecting, errr…except PETA, the ACLU, People for the American Way, the Democrat party, Barney Frank, Bill Maher ….
PLEASE UTILIZE US – WE HELP FOR FREE !!
Hello, we are a collective group consisting of 10 free yahoo online groups which joined forces in the aftermath of the murder of Terri Schiavo. We offer support, links, and post correct information and updates regarding the case free, we’re just individuals who have grouped together as a collective of 10 online Yahoo groups.
We want to extend our support to you and please email us with any updates and we will make sure all the members get them. We are currently working to get 1,000 members collectively as soon as possible. Membership is FREE and we are there to support the efforts of the Schindler family and all the brave and courageous supporters for the life of Terri and the fight that continues.
If you want to refer people to our support groups to help take some of the email load off you, please feel free to do so, we are 24 hours and someone is always on for those who want to pour out their hearts or just get together with others in a group effort to help. We know that Terri is with God now, but we also know the fight continues. We consist of ages 18-50 years old and from all walks of life and we HELP FOR FREE !!! We need to help as much as we want to help.
-Chris & Monique, Group Owners & Moderators
Terri_Schiavo Yahoo Collective Group
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/terri_schiavo
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/TerriSchiavoWasMurdered
You can list the 2 most active groups above.
Complete List of all collective groups are listed below—and we are growing everyday: WE ARE GOOD FOOT SOLDIERS !!!
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/terri_schiavo
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/TerriSchiavoWasMurdered
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/Michael_Schiavo_And_Legal_Murder
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/rememberterri
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/saveterrislife
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/terri_schindler
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/terriscampaign
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/whitedoveweavers
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/SeanHannity
This is another good site for information on continuing the fight
http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clickthru.cgi?id=KGross
I have noticed that almost (not all, but ALMOST) everyone in support of the site’s methods automatically insult everyone who disagrees with them. That is not Christ-like in any way, shape or form. I’ll probably be called “stupid” or “bone-head” for pointing this out, but oh well.
I’m not a pro-life person. Well, I do NOT support partial birth in any circumstances and I do think it should be illegal. Also, I believe we should place heavy restrictions on second-trimester abortions. However, regular birth control such as condoms, as well as most first-trimester abortions, I have no problem with. Is abortion a tough decision? Yes. Would it be an easy one for me to help my wife make? No.
But would I do it to save my wife from death? YES.
Frankly, individuals like yourselves have made me feel hated on numerous occassions and you have made me think that God hates me, as well. In particular, my struggle with bisexuality has caused the church (and sometimes I even thought God himself) to look down on and hate me. I ask you all out of compassion, not to stop what you’re doing, but just please examine your methods a bit. That’s all I ask.
I will probably be insulted greatly for this, but oh well. At least I said what I needed to say. Thank you all, and God bless you.
PS: I’m sorry for posting on this particular topic. I can post what I said somewhere else if the moderators wish me to.
Ross, I agree with you it is not Christian to call people names when you disagree with them. I’m sorry for any hate you have received from anyone who names the name of Jesus. Just because a mouse lives in a cookie jar, it doesn’t make him a cookie. :) I went to Pinellas Park because God is love and He said that when someone is thirsty give him a drink and you will be doing it to him. Matthew 25 I want you to hear how much God loves you and has a purpose for your life. Did you hear about Ashley Smith? I think that was her name.
Ross, In the hope you look at this site again. Right now all across America. Thousands of Churches are studying the book “Purpose Driven Life” That was the book Ashley read to the man who had pulled a gun from a police officer in court and killed 4 people. God used her to show him love and he let her go and turned himself in. The author is Rick Warren. There is a website that can show you where to go in your area. God bless you!
I’m happy to hear that! I can tell you have a sensitive heart and are really thinking about the issues. I’m in college and I’m writing a paper on Terri and the media. It’s heart wrenching for me. And it’s due tomorrow. It was nice to meet you. God loves all his creation. If you have a pulse God has a purpose for your life. We had this quotethis morning; ” It’s never too late to be who you were meant to be.” I forget who said it. :( One of my favorite verses Zephaniah 3:17
Bye!
some interesting thoughts on terri’s life and death:
If Michael Schiavo and his experts and lawyers truly believed that Terri was in
PVS, then why would they have cared if some nurses wanted to humor themselves by attempting even minimum therapy? Why would they have cared if Terri’s teeth were cleaned? Why would they have cared if she was allowed to go outside? Why would they have cared if her wheelchair was repaired? Why would they have cared if she were allowed to receive communion, or listen to certain music? Why would they have refused an MRI for her? Why would they have insisted that no photos or film of Terri be taken? These were major warning flags that something smelled here. If the brain damaged woman was truly in a PVS, then allowing some or all of these things wouldn’t have mattered in the
least.
Secondly, if a man leaves his wife – for all intents and purposes, emotionally and physically abandons her – and then goes off and gets himself a girlfriend, moves in with her, and has two kids with her, then how is it that that man still expects, after years of this, to be able to make legal and moral decisions regarding the wife’s welfare? No court with any sort of sense of
fairness or decency would allow that man to do so, in my view.
Thirdly, if my daughter married a man, who, for whatever reason, later gave up on her for all intents and purposes, went off and had two kids with another woman, but wouldn’t divorce my daughter – i would have ample reason to dislike
that individual, perhaps intensely. The Schindlers had every reason to be cynical about Michael – he actually had them removed from the visitors list for nearly a year, and he promised in court during the malpractice suit that he’d take care of her for as long as he lived. That lasted just long enough for him to get the money. Very suspicious.
Fourth, when at least two nurses who were formerly employed at this place, at different times, said essentially the same thing about Michael and his bizarre behavior and comments that were in no way consistent with those of a loving husband or guardian, that was significant. They both swore on penalty of
perjury that he called her a ‘bitch’ and couldn’t wait till she died, so he could be ‘rich’. At least one said that an insulin vial was found just after Michael left Terri’s room. That is attempted murder. Why it wasn’t investigated is anyone’s guess. Perhaps this is a care facility that prefers to sweep things like that under the rug. But that in itself is the cover-up of a
crime, and begs to be looked into.
Fifth, it is a fact that Greer has acted in an arrogant and pompous manner, given that he’s simply a probate judge. He never ruled on many of the motions that were significant and germaine to the question of Michael’s competency as
guardian. Why was that? It would seem to have been the fundamental question, before
allowing life and death decisions to be made, to determine if the guardian who
wants to make the decisions is fit to do so. And there was ample evidence and
testimony that he was not. But Greer ignored all that, having never even
ruled on those motions. That was a huge red flag.
Her best friend who was with her the day before the collapse, along with her family, says she did NOT have an eating disorder. This woman was on Hannity and Colmes recently. People that close to her would know about such things as
eating disorders. Also, some of her friends came forward to say that Terri did NOT believe in the ‘right to die’ philosophy – one of them made a joke in her presence about Karen Quinlan, and Terri did not find it funny, expressing
opposite views of those that Michael claims she held.
The most bizarre aspect of this is that hearsay evidence that was contradicted
by other hearsay evidence was used to support her supposed end of life wishes. The acceptance in court of hearsay evidence that supported Michael, but not the hearsay evidence that supported the Schindlers was very disturbing. In
addition, i don’t understand how a little probate judge had this much authority
- to order the forced starvation of a woman based on selected hearsay evidence.
And another thing – to order the tube disconnected because of the guardian’s
wishes is one thing – but to forbid any food or water to Terri IN ADDITION to
removing the tube is out and out murder, in my view, by judicial order. If he
had ruled that “ok, we’ll remove the tube, but if she’s able to accept food
and water orally, then I have no authority to order her to be starved to
death.” And yet, he somehow found that authority. Amazing.
There are signifcant doubts as to whether Terri was in a PVS or not. Not all
medical testimony supported Michael – some of it supported the Schindlers. But
it’s safe to say that without any therapy for years and years, that Terri’s
condition deteriorated. What if she’d been given even minimum therapy?
Perhaps the PVS diagnosis would’ve been even less certain – we don’t know. But we do
know that on one hand, they claim the PVS diagnosis is absolute, but on the
other, she was denied even simple comforts and minimal therapy. How can they have
it both ways? If she was in a PVS, then it wouldn’t have hurt a bit to give her all of
the things her parents kept asking for – such as trips outside, photographs, attempts at therapy such as swallowing, etc…. Why wouldn’t Michael Schiavo and Judge Greer have simply humored the Schindlers if they were absolutely sure that Terri was hopeless?
Over and above all this, you have the bone scan, which is the most disturbing and inexplicable aspect of this whole case.
Terri was killed, not allowed to die.
ross and mary ann
this is a link regarding forced starvation….
could you please leave or post something relevant please?
ross
actually, no one has yelled at you. sounds a bit like whining to me. but we are waiting for you to actually have something to say that a) relates to the subject matter of this post, and b) makes logical sense. here you are on a link about the zogby poll relating to forced starvation of innocent american citizens,
and you start out lashing out at people for supposedly attacking anyone who disagrees, and blaming others for how you feel about God. and then you go on with a confused mix of bisexual confessions to other issues such as your support of baby-killing (as long as it’s early in pregnancy), while at the same time trying to define ‘Christ-like’. if you want to talk about bisexuality, i’m sure there are sites for you to do that. if you want to talk about abortion, then there are links on this site that cover that subject. but i’ve simply asked you to pay attention to the subject matter of the link, or go find another.
oh, and who said anything about ‘spiritual growth’? if you want to make spiritual growth, then i suggest you go to church or read a Bible or tune in some Christian radio.
hank
my suggestion is that you actually do a bit of research before you make silly statements. it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see something fishy in the fact that michael’s remembrance of the statement terri supposedly made came 8 years after the collapse, and that he is on record as saying that he “had no idea” what she’d want. it was only after he got the money that he ‘remembered’. and the other people who supported what he said (two of them) all have the last name schiavo, and they didn’t remember for eight years either. humm…..
as far as the hearsay on the schindler side, it was much stronger than that. her best friend (not a member of the family) relates a specific conversation with terri that was literally the exact opposite of what michael later claimed. and her family, especially her mom and dad, knew her much better than michael – they were only married about five years before the collapse. a very mysterious collapse, i might add, where only michael was present….
finally, though your comment “this is just stupid – a patient could just say i’m hungry”, is so ridiculous that it’s hard to know where to begin. first of all, a person fitting terri’s description of not being comatose, not being in a coma or on life support, may not be able to speak for any one of a number of reasons. but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be fed, just because, for whatever reason, they are unable to speak. secondly, is it necessary for someone to say “i’m hungry” before we actually give them food? it’s obvious that every person needs food and water on a daily basis, or they will die. so the default position for a compassionate and moral society should be, when in doubt, give people food and water and don’t starve them to death. the exception would be if the person has specifically stated, in writing via a medical directive, that they do not want to be fed by a tube.
but again, if you were more informed, you’d know that tube feeding is a method used generally by nursing home staff and hospice staff because the caregivers don’t want to spend the time spoon feeding someone. after years of tube feeding, the muscles in the throat tend to atrophy, and usually have to be retrained to accept mouth feeding. in terri’s case, that was never tried, because michael refused it, and the corrupt little judge ruled against even trying. however, two of terri’s nurses testified that they used to feed her jello and pudding by mouth and she did just fine with it.
this was a killing, hank.
do your homework.
“If a disabled person is not terminally ill, not in a coma, and not being kept alive on life support, and they have no written directive, should or should they not be denied food and water?” only 7% responded that they should while a whopping 80.3% said they should not.”
to me, the most amazing part of this poll is that 7% of the people polled actually said that a disabled person should be starved to death.
america, look how far you have fallen….
ross
you haven’t been attacked, but you keep whining like a small child. (ok, now you’ve been attacked) but i’m just telling you the brutal truth. i think you need to grow up, ross.
i asked you to stay on the subject at hand, but you want to make yourself the subject.
ross, you can claim the Name of Christ if you want, and claim because you been confronted and even chastised (both are things that Christians are commanded to do, ross), that you’re being “persecuted”. please.
let me ask you – when Jesus made a whip and drove the money changers out physically, was He being Christ-like? when He called people snakes, vipers, children of the devil, and whitewashed tombs, was He being Christ-like? you see, the christ you refer to didn’t exist – the one who went around giving people hugs and such.
i suggest that you get a bible and do some study.
Meet Judge Greer’s pastor
Posted: March 29, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
I am convinced God uses trials like the Terri Schiavo case to test men.
Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge George Greer was tested — and found wanting.
He had seven years to consider this case and got it wrong every time.
I don’t know Greer personally, but I know many people like him. They go to church on Sunday and then between Monday and Friday lead lives with no seeming connection to what they hear preached in the pulpit, what they read in the Bible, what they claim to believe of the Christian faith.
This may be the biggest single problem we have in America today — this disconnect between the spiritual lives of Christians and how they practice their faith in the world.
Greer, until recently, was a member of the Calvary Baptist Church in Clearwater, Fla. He left at the urging of Pastor William Rice, who counseled him wisely: “You must know that in all likelihood it is this case which will define your career and this case that you will remember in the waning days of life. I hope you can find a way to side with the angels and become an answer to the prayers of thousands.”
Rice has my highest regard for that decision. Too many pastors in this country don’t require obedience to God as a prerequisite for church membership. They seem to believe in a kind of “cheap” grace that comes with regular attendance or tithing rather than a Christian walk. They seem to have no minimal standards for fellowship and communion with the saints.
There are few heroes in the Terri Schiavo scandal. Her parents and siblings qualify. Terri herself qualifies. Those who braved arrest to bring her cups of water qualify. And, in my book, so does Rev. William Rice.
Do you want to know why the church doesn’t have influence and impact in our increasingly secular world today?
Because there are too many so-called Christians like Judge George Greer and not enough like Pastor William Rice.
Greer’s friends have attacked the church and defended the judge, saying he was interpreting the law to the best of his ability. However, if that is true, then Greer, as a Christian, had a duty to obey God’s laws rather than man’s laws. That would require him to leave the bench if he truly saw a conflict. Instead, Greer opted to leave his church — and, presumably, his weak faith.
“Like evangelicals across the world, we are horrified at the thought that a handicapped woman could be, in effect, starved to death before a watching world,” Rice wrote. Admitting he was not a legal or medical expert, Rice asserted: “I know right from wrong. I know what God thinks about human life. I know there is only one way to describe the prospect of starving a woman to death because she cannot feed herself. It is wrong.”
Rice continued: “Morality and truth must serve as our guide. Terri Schiavo is not on life support. She is not dying. Good evidence exists to suggest that she is responsive. All she receives is food and water, the same as you and me. Are we to conclude that she is less than human because she cannot feed herself? Can a month-old child feed himself? Is an elderly patient stricken with some debilitating disease and unable to feed herself suddenly less human? Do we now use an IQ test to determine if someone possesses the right to live? Isn’t that God’s choice? Only God can give life, and only He should take it away.”
“Tread carefully if you think this is simply about a dying woman being allowed to die peacefully,” Rice wrote. “Remember when we were told that Roe v. Wade was simply about helping women who had been raped or whose lives were imminently threatened? Today, few abortions fall into that category, but millions of human lives have been sacrificed upon the altar of selfishness. And the slide down the slippery slope continues.”
In case Greer was still confused, his pastor gave him more to think about.
“This case seems complex, but it is as simple as four words: ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ If you need a compass for this complex case, you’ll find it there,” he wrote. “As we all know, the Sixth Commandment means it is wrong to murder — to take the life of an innocent person without just cause. If I were the nurse in that hospice center and the directive were given to me to discontinue feeding a living human being and watch as he or she starved to death, I couldn’t do it. I’d rather get fired, resign or do something else.”
Christians can go on blaming others for the problems we face in this country. Or we can go into the churches and start cleaning up the messes we have in our own houses of worship. It’s time to take back the churches. It’s time to renew the idea of standards. It’s time to make church membership mean something again.
Judge George Greer did the wrong thing. Pastor William Rice did the right thing. If we had more pastors like Rice, we’d have fewer judges like Greer.
– Joseph Farah
I think that the most disturbing thing about the Schiavo case is the way that the media was able to manipulate the story to make it appear as if it were a “right to die” case. But, this case was never about that — Terri was KILLED, plain and simple. It won’t end here. This case has set a horrible precedent that will profoundly affect the USA and the rest of the world by making all forms of euthanasia more acceptable.
Dawn T.,
How right you are. The phrases “Right to choose” and “right to die” are both cruel smokescreens for giving both the state and medical professionals the right to play God, and kill the innocent, as happened wholescale under the Third Reich. Following is an excellent article written by an R.N. about this atrocity and the trend it represents…
George Felos: Dehydration And Starvation – A Great Way To Die!
By Barbara Stock (03/29/05)
George Felos, perhaps trying to ease his guilt, (though this is unlikely since one must have a conscience to feel guilt) and improve his image as a heartless ogre, went before cameras and fed the world one of the biggest lies it has ever heard. He related how “peaceful and beautiful” Terri is as she lay dying. I guess if dying of dehydration and starvation is so lovely, perhaps we should all die that way. Perhaps we should give that option to criminals on death row. We certainly should stop being concerned about the children in poor countries dying of starvation. George Felos has told us it’s a great way to die!
All of the chaos surrounding Terri’s impending death isn’t just about Terri or her family. It is about what we as a society are going to be willing to accept in the future.
The court rulings, all in favor of the legal murder of a non-terminal human being, are laying the groundwork for the legal euthanasia of the old and physically and mentally handicapped people of all ages. We have become Nazi Germany/1933. This is a dark and dangerous path that America is moving down and what amazes and frightens me is how willingly some people are being led and what lengths are being taken to justify murder.
Let’s clear one thing up right from the start. There cannot be any comparison between Terri Schiavo’s case and the case of a person in the final stages of cancer or some other life-ending disease. Terri is not terminally ill; she was never terminally ill. She was illegally admitted to the hospice where she is now being killed. Her admission was illegal under Hospice protocol and Medicare guidelines because she was not terminally ill. With a simple feeding tube, she could live for decades without any health problems at all. If Terri had received the therapy that has been denied to her, she probably could eat food normally. Terri is not brain dead. She has committed no crime. Yet, because her husband convinced a few judges that Terri “would not want to live that way,” she has been condemned to death with fewer rights than a mass murderer. In fact, she has no rights at all. Terri never had her own lawyer to represent her.
If Terri was truly brain dead, it would not be murder, but she is not brain dead. Every day in this country families make the painful decision to “pull the plug” on a loved one who has suffered a catastrophic injury. Their now-damaged-beyond-repair bodies are kept alive totally by machines and their brains are not functioning enough to tell them to breathe. Often, an external pacemaker is needed just to keep their hearts beating. It’s only a matter of time before their bodies realize the organ-in-charge is dead. In fact, they don’t swallow their own saliva, a sign of severe brain damage. These people require almost constant suctioning or they drool and aspirate their own secretions.
Has anyone noticed that Terri does not drool?
I have heard people say everyone has the right to refuse medical treatment. This is true. However, the law clearly states that minors and those who cannot speak for themselves are protected and if those in charge of their care refuse treatment for them, the state makes that child or person a ward of the state for treatment.
Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in blood transfusions. If the child of a Witness member is brought to the emergency room hemorrhaging and the parents refuse a transfusion for that child and that child will die without a blood transfusion, a judge will issue a decree making that child a temporary ward of the state. Every ER in America has a judge on speed dial for just that reason.
Why has Terri not been given the same protection under the law? Because the man appointed to be her guardian has decided he wants her to die. For reasons that simply cannot be explained, the legal system turned Terri’s fate over to the two men who stood to benefit from her death. George Felos has benefited financially in the litigation involved in killing Terri. It has been reported that as much as $600,000 of Terri’s money has been paid to George Felos and his staff. Judge Greer even allowed Terri’s money to be spent by Felos to “deal with the media.” Michael Schiavo reportedly spent most of the money that he was awarded on personal expenses, impressing a long string of girlfriends, and in his quest to kill his wife. He certainly didn’t spend much of it on Terri. The taxpayers have been paying her bills for the last five years.
Judge Greer waved off all the sworn statements from people claiming that Michael Schiavo had told them he didn’t know what to do with Terri because they had never talked about dying. Instead, the mantra has become, “This is what Terri wants.” Greer ignored the bone scan riddled with healed fractures and numerous claims of spousal abuse. Greer just didn’t care.
With that slogan in hand, those who support euthanasia had a poster child. “Terri wants to die” was what everyone heard. A lie repeated often enough will eventually be believed. In truth, no one knows what Terri wants. When she was finally asked what she wanted, the same judge that condemned her to death decided that her response was not “credible.” He took nearly an entire day to issue a rejection he probably knew he would issue after five minutes. Did he hope she would die and save him the trouble? Why did Judge Greer never go sit by Terri’s bed and observe the woman now dying because of his order?
People must understand the goal of those who support the euthanasia of human beings. They are not talking about the terminally ill. Those people have been allowed to leave this earthy plain without intervention for a long time. The “Right to Die” supporters want the legal right to “humanely kill” anyone disabled or infirm that is deemed a burden or that is “suffering” because of their condition. If Grandma is a little senile and no one has time to take care of her, just go to court, say that Grandma didn’t want to live this way, and legally dispose of her. It will all be neat, tidy, clean, and legal. No muss, no fuss. Will Grandma be starved to death like Terri? Of course not, since in a year or two, that also will be deemed cruel. No, it will just be a quick lethal injection and a then off to the crematorium for Grandma. The slogan of “Right to Die” should be “Right to Murder.” That would be the correct description.
Anyone who thinks this is outrageous and will never happen here needs to study history. In the early days of Nazi Germany, people were convinced that their handicapped children, elderly family members, and severely injured loved ones “would not want to live that way.” These unfortunate souls should be humanely put to sleep so that they could be “reborn” in healthy bodies. People lined up, willingly, to have their own family members killed. So don’t think it can’t happen here: It is happening right now–in Florida. Terri is just the first step. After this, it will be much easier to dispose of the unwanted. There is now legal precedent.
The massive and false “this is what Terri’s wants” and “starvation is a beautiful way to die” is in full swing and it is being believed. The reports were a lie that she can’t feel pain because of her massive brain injury. Terri is now being given morphine to “ease her pain.”
You should be afraid, very afraid. The day will come when euthanasia will no longer be voluntary, but it will be the law. When you are no longer a viable contributor to society, you will be judged a burden and that will be a death sentence. When your family decides they don’t want to be bothered with you anymore, it’s the end of the line. What and who–are we becoming?
Barbara is a Registered Nurse who is branching out to political writing. She has had several articles posted on numerous political pages.
—-
The media has done it’s best, with few exceptions, to glamourize this murder (and euthanasia generally) just as the Nazi propaganda machines did. Further steps from “voluntary” euthanasia to Auschwitz included the following: (A brief review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening…)The Nazi atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the “quality of life” more important than the “sanctity of life.”
“The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven more recognizable steps.“
“1) There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their misery. “
“2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were made to remove “useless” expenses from the budget. That led to the killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri ? This “rationale” was used in her case, but even if valid, was not really applicable, since Michael Schiavo had, early on, discontinued all rehabilitative therapy when it appeared that her recovery, even if partial, could pose a threat to his reputation and financial status). Interestingly, both George Felos and Adolf Hitler referred to their prospective victims as “useless eaters”.
3) The elderly without relatives or private resources were considered the states burdensome disposable property, and killed next.
4) Not surprisingly, this atrocity was followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly poor people.
5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were drawing welfare.
6) It was then the turn of the ideologically unwanted, political enemies of the state, “religious extremists,” “disloyal” individuals who were holding the government back from providing “every citizen” a “better quality of life.”
7) Last, but by no means least, those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit such as J(e)w and others who were not “pure Aryans” were subjected to bizarre, fruitless, and barbaric “medical experiments” and murdered by the millions.
Once the first step, acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
WHAT SANE SOCIETY WANTS TO LIVE, AND DIE, LIKE THAT?!
More insight into this has already been posted once on this site, but not this thread; it definitely bears repeating here:
The Crooked Road
Our society did not just suddenly stumble onto the Terri Schiavo case. The sordid specter of a government resolutely condemning an innocent citizen to death by starvation and dehydration is the end result of a very long and tortured process. Judge George Greer did not concoct such a brazen and perverse wickedness all on his own.
The ever insightful Ben House has reviewed a chilling book that attempts to trace at least part of that long and crooked road. It makes for difficult but necessary reading:
I like to read, and I especially enjoy reading history. Yet sometimes reading is a grim burden. There are those books, subjects, and studies, which fulfill an intellectual curiosity, but depress the spirit. All centuries and eras have their dark clouds, but the Twentieth Century was especially known for human horrors and evils. From concentration camps to gulags, from Nazis to Communists, from aerial bombing to genocide, the means and extent of the human capacity for evil seemed boundless in the last century. Technology and human accomplishments seemed to herald a golden age in 1900. The golden age was soon mired up in the trenches of World War I, the tramping feet of soldiers in the dark valley of World War II, and the iron and bamboo curtains of Communism lasting throughout much of the century.
The Christian teacher and writer must confront these evils. Like Dante’s journey through the Inferno, he must descend from depth to depth examining the evidences and artifacts of human depravity practiced by wicked regimes. We are compelled to better understand what turned a Catholic choirboy and an Orthodox seminary student into Hitler and Stalin. And they did not act alone, so we have to figure what dynamics created Goebbels and Himmler, Beria and Molotov. What sycophantic forces create legions of immoral monsters to surround such men as Hitler and Stalin? We also have to read the accounts of those who suffered. The victims, immortalized in the writings of Solzhenitsyn and the diaries of Anne Frank, must be remembered. Human suffering, not a comfortable subject, must be remembered by those who live in comfort. Yes, even the good guys, like the United States and Great Britain, have their dark secrets. Aspects of the Boer War waged by Great Britain and racial atrocities in America cannot be ignored just because they dint our pristine armor.
Grim books must be read. One such recent reading of mine was From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany by Richard Weikart (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). This book, sober and academic, focused on root causes of the Holocaust. It examined ideas, academic communities, intellectual ponderings, arcane journal studies, and obscure (to us now) scientific, political, and ethical trends among the educated elite. This survey of German thought in the late 1800s and early 1900s would be useful only to academic specialists (meaning, Ph.D. candidates in search of a minor point) were it not for the sequel to the story. The story itself is the initial impact of Darwinian thought on issues of ethics and morality. Darwin’s works caused an awakening, an enlightenment, for many found a liberation in Darwinism from the restraints of the older Christian-natural law consensus. The sequel was the rise of the Third Reich and Hitler in the 1930s. The issue is this: Was their a connection between the student in the early 1900s reading Darwin and asking, “How should we then live?” and his son attending a rally at Nuremberg thirty years later?
Linking your enemies to Hitler is an overused and much abused tactic. I have seen pictures of both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, presented by their enemies, showing them caught in the midst of a wave looking like they were giving Nazi salutes. Any position, any viewpoint, any program can be discredited by linking it to Nazism. Opponents to Darwin in our day, whether committed Creationists or some form of Intelligent Design supporters, have frequently been dismissed out of court for lacking scientific credentials and intellectual seriousness. Meaning, if you doubt Darwinism, you are by definition stupid. (Dr. Richard Weikart, by the way, is an associate professor of history at California State University, but that is irrelevant if Darwin is questioned.) What is the value in this debate of using the Hitler card?
First, we need to note where we are in the long-term battle between proponents of evolution and believers in some form of creation. The battle of Yorktown took place two years before the Treaty of Paris was signed. Likewise opponents of evolution have won some decisive victories, even though the war continues. Surely, there have been hard fought skirmishes along the way. Chesterton and Spencer debated in England over a century ago. William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow duked it out in Dayton, Tennessee in the 1920s. Science faculties fought state legislatures, clergymen railed against scientists, parents protested against textbooks, and so on it went. We so often assume the Darwinists have won the day. Public school textbooks tow the party line, regardless of what stickers are affixed to the book or what verbal tricks are used to tone down the language. College professors hold to Darwinism with the tenacity of a medieval monk reciting his prayers. Endless scientific documentaries, especially those featuring animals, regale us with evolutionary dogma. Even most Christian colleges blush when a freshman gullibly mentions 6-day creation in mixed (that is, secular and Christian) company. We know the catechism question: “What do all credible, educated scientists believe” Answer: “Evolution is our god and Darwin is his prophet.”
Yet, we as Christians do not notice that the enemy has pulled behind its academic Maginot Line and made concessions on the implications of Darwinism to ethics and public policy. The biology professor might not allow for any objections to Darwinism inside the confines of his classroom. But don’t take the biology book to sociology class or to political science class or to ethics class. Like a body part in a Picasso painting, Darwinism is not to be attached to the rest of the body of human thought in a rational traditional way. This refusal to apply Darwinism to all of life was not always the case. First it was necessary that the university be replaced by the multiversity.
Darwinism was dangerous in the day of the university. When Ernst Haeckel or Herbert Spencer read Darwin, their minds—still a product of a fading Christian consensus—adhered to a unity of truth. Therefore, men sought for a university education, a universal search for truth, a unifying principle of reality. For this reason, many people were born again upon accepting Darwin. Darwin offered not just biology, but philosophy, a worldview. At last an alternative to Christianity was offered. Darwin’s book was a best seller to a world longing for liberation. Darwin’s early disciples grasped the implications of his gospel quite quickly.
Sparks were flying in the academic circles, especially in Germany. Germany was brimming with brilliant minds and a nationalistic will-to-power. The higher critics were leading the world in theological studies, leading even the most conservative branches of Christian churches to send its best to Germany to study theology. Some of these same higher critical were furiously undermining the foundations of Christianity. “God is on life-support and the Bible contains errors” was proclaimed in the theology department, while across the walkway in the science department, similarities were noted between the embryos of frogs and the students’ baby brothers.
There was a German propensity for producing the best, for accentuating the finest. This resulted in amazing technology and craftsmanship, and when this tendency wedded science and social policy, the proto-Third Reich was born in the minds of men. But for the time, it was only words and paper competing against the older ethic, once carved on stone. A new science, in a new country, with a new worldview created the genesis of a new ethics and a new version of what constitutes a healthy society. We are all bothered by the sufferings and miseries of the incurably ill, the elderly, the infirm, and the hopelessly insane. They are inconvenient. They tie us down. They do not produce anything for the common welfare. The new ethic suggested that it was more moral to dispose of such people than to be inconvenienced. The older Genesis account proclaimed man made in God’s image; the new Genesis divided man into categories of fit and unfit.
Slower, sicker, weaker animals die in the pack. Either they are killed as prey or they are unable to kill prey. This benefits the herd or the pack, and so surely benefits the tribe. Of course, all this was academic debate: The meanderings of scholars were loosed upon the pages of a journal or in the company of his fellows at conferences. Still iron sharpens iron. One scholar influenced another. Each book sparked another flurry of articles. Each lecture raised questions of further implications and applications. Just the merry life of professors—debating and arguing—and passing on to their students the findings of their research.
World War I upset many of these scholars. Although in one sense, the killing of thousands by the incessant machine gunning and poison gas might seem just another phase of the fit eliminating the unfit, still the war was troublesome. As Weikart says, “… what they found objectionable about modern wars was that the wrong people were being killed—the strong and the healthy rather than the weak and sickly.” Merely disposing of useless individuals and inferior races was helpful, but white Europeans slaughtering one another was unacceptable. Then out of the ashes, the destruction, and despair of Germany’s defeat, Hitler arose. Hitler was not a scholar, although he was not stupid either. Like many of us, he picked up the major parts of his worldview second and third-hand. Whether he ever read Darwin or Darwin’s pupils is irrelevant. Ideas have consequences and intellectuals change nations and arcane philosophies translate into political agendas. Many followers of Darwin opposed Hitler and some died under his regime. Still as Weikart points out, “No matter how crooked the road from Darwin to Hitler, clearly Darwinism and eugenics smoothed the path for Nazi ideology, especially for the Nazi stress on expansion, war, racial struggle, and racial extermination.”
This crooked road wound through the university. Thankfully, for a season, that institution no longer exists. Fragmentation of reality has replaced universal truth, and multiversities have replaced universities. Just suggest to your biology professor that our race (any race) is superior. Propose to your political science professor that we purify the land. “Don’t you dare apply Darwinism to politics,” they will angrily reply. Did you forget that politics and religion don’t mix?
Yes, we still have our expendables. Aborted children are dispensed with by denying them the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The sick and mentally incapable are at risk in our nation. The ethics of the university campus still reach the grammar school classrooms all too quickly. Yet, the Darwinists, who are many in number, are tightlipped when it comes to ethics. It is absurd to link the truth of “Survival of the Fittest” with horrors of the Third Reich. Their silence about the implications of Darwinism says too much.
Richard Weikart’s book is filled with many brilliant insights, quotes, and references. Scholars out there, like Weikart, are doing in academic circles what bloggers are doing to the media. This is not pleasant reading. This is not the delightful read to have at the bedside. Not a lot of people will read this book. But for those of us who teach, who preach, and who pound away at our computers, this is a book we need to know.
– from Dr. George Grant’s blog at kingsmeadow.com
The following was a challenge given out [Ed. note: which has now been slightly modified April 18, 2005] and also included below is a URL for our press release:
From your friendly neighborhood moderator/creator of terrisjustice. See below. We have been challenged and now I must issue my challenge to you.
Those in the pinnacles of authority [Jeb Bush and others] believe that we are going to melt away and give up seeking justice for Terri.
The famous motto of the Zapatistas is one response of ours in this regard: Ya Basta!
We will never surrender! We will never tire!
Challenge to you: go out and inform 10 other people what happened to Terri. Get them signed on terrisjustice. Ask them to do the same.
This is how the grassroots grows and is the only true means of getting a true geometrical progression realized.
If you are not for getting justice for Terri against those with blood on their hands do not join this list. If you are a spy or have mal-intents and you try to join or succeed in joining please leave the list or it may be that one day you will die a horrible death not at our hands but as a result of your disingenuous actions which resulted in karmic repercussions. This is a form of what is called felos-de-se (a senseless or purposeful act of self-murder).
NOTE:
A great deal of lee-way is necessary, given the scope of the work, and I am committed to freedom of expression. HOWEVER, it does sometimes become necessary to remind ourselves of our purpose and the basic rules of etiquette when communicating with others.
Flame wars and attacks on the character of others are not allowed on this list, and other members of the list not involved should not be subjected to emails containing such material – carry them on in private please if you must, or more adult behavior, don’t indulge in them at all.
We will remind once in awhile if things get a little out of hand, and any continued offense will be dealt with by either a moderation of the posts of the offender(s) or, when all else fails, a complete ban on those posts, especially when several complaints have been received from offended list members.
We have never had to take action in some years of doing this, and we hope this will never be necessary. Thank you for your support, and may your experience on this list be as enjoyable as it is informative.
URL for press release [also contained in Yahoo! News]:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/4/prweb229498.php
JS