Slashdot Mirror

... Schiavo had no cerebral cortex, ...

Riiiiiiight. Then here are some amazing videos of someone with no cerebral cortex. PVS my a$$.

Too bad the demoncrats executed her. Find out more at http://www.terrisfight.org and http://cultureoflife.on.nimp.org

Surely you are aware of the degree to which the Enlightenment project has sought to remove Christianity from public discourse?

Has it occurred to you that maybe it's not a movement but just people coming to the conclusion that christianity's time has come and gone? Maybe they've looked at all the hate, dishonesty, stupidity and pure evil that christianity stands for these days and have had enough? Don't be so quick to look for conspiracies.

My son, who will not say it, is held up for daily ridicule because of his religious convictions--and I have no alternative other than to keep paying for the public education that my children will not get. Surely this isn't fair?

I have no children at all. If I have to pay, so do you.

This site will give you one side of the argument. and the Wikipedia link.

You hear me, United Linux? Never!!!

If you dont' want to be put on life support, shouldn't you declare yourself a DNR before the fact? If she was a DNR, she shouldn't have been put on life support in the first place... But now that she is on it, doesn't removing the tube have a lot more impact? It's really sad that she's 'living' that way, i think everyone can agree with that. But, removing the tube and letting her starve to death really seems inhumane.

read the timeline of what's gone on in her case. Her husband really seems suspicious to me.

Yes, it is quite selfish to divert $100,000s of dollars to keeping the heart beating in a braindead human

In the current case of Terri Schindler-Schiavo, the money is her own. She has $750,000 of her own money, from a malpractice suit, to keep her alive. But her husband and legal guardian wants it, so he got a court to order her death. Oh, and she's not even brain dead. Not even close.

That's selfishness.

I refuse to place a monetary price on human life, because what has a price can be sold, discounted and liquidated.

Or you may be thinking of a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order.

No, I'm thinking of the cases where plugs are "pulled" on those that are not "brain dead". Fortunately it's rare, but only because the legal obstacles that must be hurdled. The UK may be different, but in the US it happens. One reference to a current case is Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Terri may not be competent enough now to make legal decisions, but she is most certainly not brain dead.

Is the thought of being branded a member of the "religious right" too high a price to pay for defending a person's right to live?

Terri is brain damaged, but she is not brain dead. She is still a living human being in every definition of the phrase. The only "life support" she received was a feeding tube. But the courts have ruled, and enforced with police, that she may no longer be fed, not even by her closest relatives. A priest was even prevented by police from administering communion because the host was considered "food". Terri's is being executed by the government for the crime of being inconvenient to her legal guardian.

Interesting thing about being mentally handicapped. If you're born mentally handicapped, then your rights and life are protected, but if you have a severe accident and become mentally handicapped, in the state of Florida you can be legally starved to death.

Note that Terri is not in a coma and is not a vegetable. She's been denied treatment to help her learn to swallow and eat on her own again. She has less than two weeks to live unless somebody does something.

You're right, we don't treat people that well.

The real issue today is whether the State of Florida has the right to starve/dehydrate a brain damaged woman to death. Terri had her feeding tube removed on Friday.

I don't see why an AI should have more of a right to life than a living human being does.