So I just really don't understand this ....

Why if someone says I want to fucking die ... give me a gun I want to blow my brains out. Why is it they are not allowed to do that? Why can't someone say, I want to die, so I am going to kill myself.

Why is it that we are not allowed to kill a baby in the final stages of pregnancy? The baby has no clear thought, yeh it is alive, but why are we not allowed to kill it if we want.

Yet apparently it is OK for someone to say they want to be killed if in a vegatative state? I don't get it ... whats the difference between that and the others.

A living person is being killed ... Terry Schaivo or however or whatever her name is ... is being starved to death by her own husband. She never wrote it anywhere, he just says they talked about it, and thus he is allowed to do it. To me it seems an awful lot like assisted suicide and late term abortion ... so why not allow those if we allow this?

This whole situation just perplexes me.

Ahh just when you get comfortable with starting inane threads and no arguments with Algren it occurs.

A THREAD OF DEEP/EXISTENTIAL MATTER.

because society accepts certain things and doesn't accept certain things. Its as simple as that. Theres no real logical reason to anything.

I'm confused. You sound like you support abortions and suicide. But, your bit on Schiavo and the law allowing it seems negative.

All are legal, I believe. Abortion and suicide laws are often questioned.

I'm a little iffy on abortion, but, I recognize the fact that you can't really limit it for some people (the rich and educated) and not for others (poor; those incapable of supporting the baby, etc).

No, I am meerly commenting that I find it rather hypocritical that if you express desires to kill yourself you will be thrown in a mental institution ... if you have a late term abortion you will be thrown in jail. Suicide deals with your own life. Abortion deals with the life of something you hav created. Yet in the case of Schaivo or however you spell it, her husband is allowed to starve her to death with the blessing of the law. Mind boggling to me.

Personally I am against abortions, I guess I would personally never have one and if were faced with a situation would deal with adoption rather than abortion (If I choose to not keep the kid). I think there is really no reason for birth control. The day after pill can handle all rape related issues ... and abortion should not be used as a form of birth control ... which it is often times ... but thats another argument.

I just really don't understand how our society can let this happen, the parents get to watch their child murdered and dying infront of them, and are allowed to do NOTHING because the law says there child must be starved to death because her husband said so ....

"Sure you can go visit your daughter while she starves to death"

Yes, but the way abortion works, its not really your decision to make : )

Meh. The government should stay out of all personal decisions, period - the Schiavo case included.

Yeh just let the husband kill her ... o wait ... then its not so personal.

Not always. There are big discussions around Euthenasia programmes you know. This one isn't written in stone tablet.



You're collapsing three different arguements. Ever dawn upon you that there are nuances to each case, suicide, abortion, and Euthenasia, that do not apply to the others, and that is why distinctions are made? One could easily argue that Schiavo was already dead, and just reanimated. On the other hand, part of the legality of the trial had nothing to do with life or death, it had to do with who gets to decide (parents or husband). Only the religious right managed to combine the two. Under court scrutiny were discussions of if non-written testament should hold up lieu of a written statement, and who has the legal claim to to decide. Its not abou the life or death, had the position of the husband and parents been reversed, in theory,the courts rulings on legality of claim, oral testament, and if the goddam governor and federal congress should be involved shouldn't change. That's like collapsing an arguement over abortion and, say, spousal or parental consent.



So you never use a condom? Morning after pills (for her)? I disaggree. I think there are many reasons for using birth control, all of which would result in a massive decrease in abortions. If over-the-counter morning after pills were available everywhere and for very cheap, don't worry, abortion would be a non-issue except for in extrenuating circumstances.



That's a bit dramatic huh? They' already watched her be dead for over a decade. Society legislated for the normative. That means they passed a law that once a woman is married, unless the writes specifically that she would prefer someone other than her husband be her legal guardian, than it is automatically him. She didn't have such a statement. She had nothing written. People are argueing over what she said, and also, if saying something ha legal grounds in court. That is what society's job is. To create guidelines and let people use those. That's my on the diplomatic level. On the personal level, i say she finally got a release from her non-existant living-dead life. She was a xombie, if even. The front of her brain had already rotted, and the only thing remaining was half her automatic habits (blinking). She couldn't even digest food, breath, etc, without a machine, and in her parents adherence to her miraculous recovery, they forgot her brain wouldn't, and she would never be more than she is now. Eye blinking and a heart beat (I think, I don't even know if her heart pumped without existance). Even doctor's said she would never change from this state. All the doctors, not just one reggie lewis your-heart-is-fine doctor...all of them. Its a tricky call. In some cases there is no debate, and the parents keep right on prolonging the torture. But in this cas, her husband wanted her to die with some dignity instead of having her eating disorder-turned-comatose body be the plkayground of politcal and media machinations.

dolce. I think Eagle meant to say "Theres no reason not to use birth control"

I think all the situations you mentioned are entirely different animals, Eagle.

A perfectly healthy person that wants to commit suicide is generally more of a fixable mental (or similar) problem. A late term abortion involves a fetus that does have some the ability to feel pain and is not a willing participant in the matter.

A person who is in a vegetative state, that is not conscious, can not feel pain, has no hope of recovery, and made their wishes known before the condition is completely different from the other scenarios.

Eh? The husband is claiming that it is her wish to be taken off life support. Assuming the husband isin't lying, how is this murder?

Yeh I just mis typed ... i meant I think abortion should not be used as a form of birth control, which it has essentially become.


I also think you could say the same thing about Schiavo with regards to alot of mentally retarted people ... I just don't understand where they draw the line ... what makes one life OK to take, and another not OK to take.

Then I agree, but remember, its not accessable to everyone. Its by perscription only, so getting it if you are only on an emergency plan rather than having a private physician is very hard. Private physician knows you. You can just call into the office and they'll call it out to the closest drug store. If you don't have one (PCP) which most people in the country thanks to our retarded health care system, don't, than you would need to get to the hospital, site there at the walk-in er, and have someone check you out before giving you the perscription. Lets think what this means to some one that 1. Doesn't have a car. This is often due to underage, where parents would be in total denial if their kids asked the to get a lift to the hospital heh, lets think about that one. 2. No license, so everyone in this country other than underage people, that don't have a license, perhaps immigrants, etc. 3. Rural places. What if the nearest hospital is hours away?

To add to that, many drug stores don't carry it, especially in smaller areas, and there are not that many Planned Parenthood neighborhood chapters. And yay....COST. Yes, its nothing compared to the cost of a baby, but most people don't think this. For the uninsured, its pretty tough coughing up 70 bucks. Even though I have to say most of the concerns for this come out of the middle and upper class, so i still think the biggest problem is access and family support. That's quite a bit different than if it was over-the-counter. People can find there way to a pharmacy in the morning even if they have to go to work or school that day, and just purchase it no uestions asked. Have a friend get it if they are nervous. That would solve so many problems. Nowadays if there is a couple and only the guy has health insurance, the insurance won't even cover the cost of pills he's getting for the woman he had sex with, and his pcp can't call in pills for her either. Goes to show you who society holds responsible for broken or non-use of condoms.

Life Support ... hardly ... they are just not feeding the poor woman. They are starving her to death. If she couldn't breath on her own, couldnt pump her own heart, thats one thing, she just can't chew freaking food.

She never wrote in a will 'I want to die if I am on life support" essentially it just came up in casual conversation and I doubt she gave it much thought. Her parents want her alive, would like to take care of her, why can't he just let them? If as he as he says she is already dead, then what is the harm in letting her parents save the peace of mind of watching their child die, and let them take her. He doesn't seem like a person I would be trusting to be truthful about her claims.

It's a lot more then just not being able to chew food. Read this: http://healthlink.mcw.edu/article/921394859.html. Terri is in a persistent vegetative state. She's not "there" anymore. She has spontaneous movements because her brainstem is intact, but she's no longer Terri Schiavo, if that makes sense. She can't move. She can't talk. She doesn't feel pain.

Honestly, we are not in any kind of position to vilify the husband. We don't know how much he loves Terri. We don't know the extent of their conversations about what to do in the event of something like this. And the fact remains that he is still married to her, and still her legal guardian. It is his decision to make.

You really believe that? You really think women are going "Well, I can either use a pill or make my partner use a pill, or I can later decide to have an risky operation that will cost me money and give me great moral anguish. Guess I'll choose the anguish instead!"

Nobody nobody nobody sees abortion as an alternative to other forms of birth control.

But you don't know she didn't say that, either. Her husband has the legal authority over her. If he says thats what she wanted, then it is what it is. There is no other way around it. I think it is REDICULOUS to assume anyone would want to live in a completely vegetative state for nearly two decades. I personally doubt anyone would choose that life style to begin with. But, anyway, it is up to Micheal Schiavo and it isn't anyone else's place, including the goverment, about her future. Let her go. It has been confirmed by DOZENS of scientists that she's gone. There is no soul inside. There is no person. It's just a body. What's the point in letting it sit there, wasting away? Micheal Schiavo wants closure, and I don't blame him. But he's been turned into some murderer bby outrageous hippies. The whole thing bothers me, and I can't wait until she's gone.

I've put up with it for twenty times as long as the rest of the world. I'm finished.