Who's killing the truth? - wasRe: [Peace-discuss] Liberals and Schiavo

[Chuck Minne]

Let me ask you further with regard to the government "killing" her:

 

If the husband said resume feeding her, would the government continue to “kill” her? Or would feeding resume? Who's killing the truth?

 


"C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:Come on, Chuck -- it was the government, the state, in the person of the
court, that ordered she not be fed and hydrated, that a guard be placed to
prevent anyone's bringing her food and water. The government ended her
life: the husband didn't shoot her.

If I were Dr. Maturin, I would challenge you to a duel for that "lie."
There was in fact no agreement over the "flat EEG and the skull half full
of water." The court *prevented* the MRI and the PET scan that would have
determined whether that was true. Why is it so important for you to
believe it? --CGE


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Chuck Minne wrote:

> "C. G. Estabrook" wrote:
> 
> I think that you're right about this, in a sort of reversed fashion:
> those who insisted that the government must end the life of Terri
> Schiavo, who wasn't dying, did so because they feared that, unless
> they did, they'd have to admit that they couldn't end other human
> lives with impunity.
> 
> Jesus H. Christ! “The GOVERNMENT must end the life of Terri Schiavo.”
> Gimme a break. The courts say that her husband is the one to decide,
> and the government must keep out. Not that the GOVERNMENT MUST END HER
> LIFE. HOW YOU TWIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> And how you can ignore this: “There is no doubt about a flat EEG and a
> skull half full of water. To seriously pretend that there is, is to
> lie.”
> 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20050331/ee3a0949/attachment.htm