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

C. G. Estabrook galliher at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu
Thu Mar 31 19:50:12 CST 2005


Her husband decided to stop feeding her. Her parents went to court to
challenge that decision.  The court affirmed the husband's decision and
stopped anyone else from feeding her. --CGE


On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Chuck Minne wrote:

> 
> 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
> 



More information about the Peace-discuss mailing list