SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : General Topics : Terri Schiavo, death by starvation, please pray for her

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Next Page )
PosterThread
Angyl
Member



Joined: 2005/1/26
Posts: 153


 Re:

Quote:
Go to terrisfight.org for starters (website run by her immediate family)



Oh yeah...I'm sure there's TONS of impartial information there...

And as for Drudge and Newsmax...anyone who relies on them for impartial reporting has a box they need to step out of.

 2005/3/28 11:49Profile
Angyl
Member



Joined: 2005/1/26
Posts: 153


 Re:

Quote:
She is not and has never been on life support



See, this is what I mean by a lot of misinformation floating around regarding this case. That is simply untrue.

After Terri's collapse on Feb. 25th 1990 she WAS placed on life support due to all the damage she suffered.

Again, I ask EVERYONE interested in this case to [b][u]READ THE FACTS[/b][/u] presented in the Wolfson report.
http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/WolfsonReport.pdf

Some interesting tidbits from this report..beginning on page 8:

Quote:
[b]The clinical records within the massive case file indicate that Theresa was not responsive to neurological and swallowing tests [u]SHE RECEIVED REGULAR AND INTENSE PHYSICAL, OCCUMPATIONAL AND SPEECH THERAPIES[/b][/u]

emphasis mine. So much for the theory that Michal pushed her down the stairs and did nothing to try to help her.

Quote:
[b]There is no question that complete trust, [u]MUTUAL[/u] caring, explicit love and a common goal of caring for and rehabilitating Theresa, were the [u]SHARED INTENTIONS OF MICHAEL SHIAVO AND THE SCHINDLERS.[/u][/b]

emphasis again mine, and again we're blowing away the fabricated lie that some media in this country wants to have us believe; that Michael is some kind of monster who never did or doesn't care for his wife.

[b]
Quote:
In Autumn of 1990, following months of therapy and testing, formal diagnoses of persistent vegitative state with no evidence of improvement, Michael took Theresa to California, where she received an experimental thalmic stimulator implant in her brain. Michael remained in Californa [u]CARING FOR THERESA[/u] during a period of several months...

[/b]Emphasis mine again and again we're dispelling some myths about Michael's care for Theresa.

Quote:
[b]In 1993, the malpractice action concluded in Theresa and Michael's favor, resulting in a two element award: More than $750,000 in economic damages for Theresa and a lost of consortim award (non economic damages) of $300,000 to Michael. The court established a trust found for Theresa's financial award, with SouthTrust Bank as the Guardian and independent trustee. [u]This fund was meticulously managed and accounted for AND MICHAEL SCHIAVO HAD NO CONTROL OVER ITS USE.[/u][/b]

emphasis mine.

OOF! Another Newsmax/Druge spin/lie/theory bites the dust! Michael in fact, did NOT spend tons of Theresa's trust money trying to get her killed or on court fees...

Keep reading the report...I defy you to approach it and study it with an open heart and come away thinking the same.

 2005/3/28 12:12Profile
Matt25
Member



Joined: 2004/3/19
Posts: 69
Athens Ga

 Re:

Angyl,

If Terri was on "life support" then please explain why she is STILL ALIVE AFTER 11 DAYS of coming off "life support".

Here's an article addressing the errors of the Wolfson report from a Christian based organization. I suppose you will discredit them because they are biased towards life?[url=http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=17324]link[/url]

It's interesting that you discredit terri'sfight.org because it is run by her immediate family. They believe she is not in a vegetative state as do MANY doctors, lawyers, politicians and citizens. Have you seen the videos of her? Do you truly believe she is a "vegetable" and should be "put out of her misery"? It's unfortunate that you are siding with Michael Schiavo over her immediate family who have known her all her life. To discredit something solely because it comes from her family who does have doctors on their side is erroneous at best. Have you seen the latest news about the convicted murderer/rapist who was sentenced to death but later was resentenced to life because the jurors consulted the bible in deciding his fate?[url=http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32747]Judge changes sentence because Jurors read Bible[/url]. Are you aware of the insanity of discrediting a whole group of people for "bias" solely because of their religious faith? Does being a Christian mean you can't make objective judgements about moral and immoral topics? You do realize this is the tragedy of our day don't you? If you are a Christian and you take a stance on something you are automatically discredited because of your "bias".

More importantly, do you agree in the way they are letting her die (by starving her to death)?? Would you have rather seen her put to death another way? See my heart is quite open Angyl. This woman is being starved to death. Do you consider that this is a Christian thing to do? What do you honestly believe God thinks about her being starved to death? Don't you think if we were going to let her die we should just give her lethal injection? WHY STARVE HER TO DEATH ANGYL?? What is your excuse for excusing those actions?? My heart is quite open to the suffering of this woman and her family (well her family minus her adulterous husband Michael Schiavo who decided to wait 7 years before revealing Terri's death wish). I am lifting her and them up in prayer.

Here's another excellent article on the Schiavo Story
[url=http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43463]Terri Schiavo story[/url]
It mentions the Wolfson report. Please take your own advice and read it with an "open heart".

In response to Wolfson's comments about the settlement money:

Quote:
In 1993, the malpractice action concluded in Theresa and Michael's favor, resulting in a two element award: More than $750,000 in economic damages for Theresa and a lost of consortim award (non economic damages) of $300,000 to Michael. The court established a trust found for Theresa's financial award, with SouthTrust Bank as the Guardian and independent trustee. This fund was meticulously managed and accounted for AND MICHAEL SCHIAVO HAD NO CONTROL OVER ITS USE.



Notice that Wolfson doesn't give a [b]detailed[/b] account of how the money was spent? Notice that he just says "meticulously managed"? Here's where $545,000 of [b]Theresa's[/b] $700,000 settlement went(all of these are Michael Schiavo's attorneys, and most importantly notice that George Felos has rec'd $400,000):

Atty. Gwyneth Stanley: $10,668.05

Atty. Deborah Bushnell: $65,607

Atty. Steve Nilson: $7,404.95

Atty. Pacarek: $1,500

Atty. Richard Pearse (GAL): $4,511.95

Atty. George Felos: $397,249.99

Other - 1st Union/South Trust Bank: $55,459.85

Michael Schiavo: $10,929.95
Total: $545,852.34

"Meticulously maintained"? Please.

Definitely sounds like you have some political bias of your own over there when you make comments like:
Quote:
Another Newsmax/Druge spin/lie/theory bites the dust!



_________________
Matt M.

 2005/3/29 22:09Profile
Matt25
Member



Joined: 2004/3/19
Posts: 69
Athens Ga

 Re:

Quote:
So much for the theory that Michal pushed her down the stairs and did nothing to try to help her.



WHAT HAPPENED TO FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE?? Actions speak FAR louder than words. Michael Schiavo has been living with another woman for the last 10 years. I have a VERY hard time believing that a man who has fathered 2 children with a woman in an adulterous relationship has his current wife's best interest at heart. Wolfson may approve of Terri's husband's actions but as Christians we should know better. Why is this man living with another woman? Why hasn't he stayed with Terri FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE??? You will never convince me he has her best interest at heart. Especially with the allegations of possible domestic abuse and with former doctors stating that they had found possible evidence of abuse
[url=http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/terri_schiavo_bone_scan.html]Terri's actual bone scan[/url]


_________________
Matt M.

 2005/3/29 22:18Profile
Angyl
Member



Joined: 2005/1/26
Posts: 153


 Re:

Quote:
If Terri was on "life support" then please explain why she is STILL ALIVE AFTER 11 DAYS of coming off "life support".


I didn't say she's STILL on life support. I said the assertation that she "has never been on life support" is flat out wrong. She has. Immediately after her accident it was necessary to save her life.

Quote:
They believe she is not in a vegetative state as do MANY doctors, lawyers, politicians and citizens.

And there are just as many (more in fact) doctors, lawyers, politicians and citizens (70% of US citizens according to every poll if you want to use that ridiculous group as some sort of qualifier) who think she [b]IS[/b] in a vegitative state. Your point?

Quote:
It's unfortunate that you are siding with Michael Schiavo over her immediate family who have known her all her life.

There's nothing unfortunate about it. Scripture tells us that she is bonded to her husband in a way she never was to her own family. The two of them [b]ARE ONE![/b] It is unfortunate that YOU want to disregard scripture and place her parents wishes above that of her husband which God says they are joined together...one mind, one body. You attempt to set an EXTRAORDINARLY DANGEROUS PRECIDENT in this country by wanting to allow courts to tell loving spouses that their parents' wishes will override theirs whenever it comes down to it.

Why does scripture talk of "leaving their father and mother and cleaving." if we should just go ahead and value parents wishes over spouses? No, no...it's not unfortunate that I side with Michael..it's unfortunate that you are siding with her parents.

Quote:
Are you aware of the insanity of discrediting a whole group of people for "bias" solely because of their religious faith?

Yes, and are you likewise aware of the hypocrisy in what you're stating here? You're doing the exact same thing, but on the other side. You cheered when Congress tried to legislate against a husband's wishes for his wife. Is this the country you want to live in?? For all legal intents and purposes Terri was found to have said she would not want to live like this. [b]MOST AMERICANS...PROBABLY YOURSELF INCLUDED FEEL THE SAME WAY...[/b] Yet in hypocrisy at its finest, I've seen Christian after Christian admit that they would not want to be kept alive in this condition...

but I don't believe Terri said that...she should be forced to stay alive.

HUH???

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Quote:
More importantly, do you agree in the way they are letting her die (by starving her to death)?? Would you have rather seen her put to death another way?

No. I don't like the idea that she's being starved to death, but there are severe ethical concerns to killing her. For all intents and purposes, if Terri were walking, talking and perfectly "Normal" and decided to "starve" herself to death this would be a non-issue. Well legally speaking Terri has expressed her wishes to be LEFT TO DIE in this condition. That means starvation. It was her choice and I'm more for leaving her to it than leaving her "alive" like this. If I were in her condition I consider a week or two of starvation a pitiful price to pay to get to meet the Lord rather than wallowing in that kind of "life"style for decades more.

Quote:
Do you consider that this is a Christian thing to do?

Do you consider denying someone their free will to kill themselves the Christian thing to do? Why? Not even God does that. If someone wants to shoot themselves in the head, after counseling and attemting to stop them, ultimately it's their choice and there's nothing you can do to stop them. Terri has chosen to die. Leave her to it.

Quote:
WHY STARVE HER TO DEATH ANGYL??

See above. Because it's "LETTING HER DIE" (that's a statement of fact) as opposed to killing her.

And I see you posting more opinion... PURE OPINION and trying to pass it off as fact. Where do you get those numbers for how Terri's money was spent? And if, indeed it is proven that it WAS spent that way then who's fault is that? It's not Michael's...he had [b]NO CONTROL OVER IT[/b] If the trustees decided, for whatever reason, to support the husband in his endavors...seeing as he was married to Terri, then that's their choice, not Michael's blame.

As I've told my wife, I'll be glad when Terri's dead. You kept mentioning your "open heart"...here's mine. When she's gone to be with the Lord I'll be glad she's out of her misery...will you? When she's gone, I'll be glad the nation can get back to focusing on the greater picture rather than doggedly chewing over this poor woman while so many thousands (millions) others suffer and starve [b]IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!![/b] This silly crusade needs to end and the best ending will be with Terri meeting Jesus face to face and us going on with our lives and trying to improve this country as a whole.

Answer this for me, Matt:

How many people died and went to Hell because of the Christians camped outside a woman's hospice when they could have been out soulwinning?

By the way, didja hear the story about the lady whose grandfather was dying in Terri's same hospice and she, because of all the security needed outside (protesting Chrsitians, ya know) missed his last moments? True story. Why not go tell her to her face all this hooplah over Terri was worth her loss of those precious moments?

God's primary concern is NOT Terri's condition or her starvation. It is, and [b]ALWAYS HAS BEEN[/b] the gathering of souls into His kingdom.

Big picture...far bigger than Terri. Try focusing on it.

 2005/3/29 22:57Profile
Angyl
Member



Joined: 2005/1/26
Posts: 153


 Re:

Quote:
You will never convince me he has her best interest at heart.



Well then there's absolutely no point in continuing the discussion, is there, Matt? :-)

God bless, Brother and see ya.

 2005/3/29 23:00Profile
swsojourner
Member



Joined: 2003/10/3
Posts: 167


 Re:

Quote:
How many people died and went to Hell because of the Christians camped outside a woman's hospice when they could have been out soulwinning?



I'll answer it for you..how many people went to hell while you were twiddling your thumbs here ?

ridiculous


KN


_________________
Karsten Nordmo

 2005/3/29 23:14Profile
kirindor
Member



Joined: 2005/3/29
Posts: 13
Soon to be Upton, MA

 Re:

I am amazed at how many Christians draw fine distinctions between life and death. We "allow" someone to die, which seems so passive by withholding the means of life, which is so active. We could call it a sin of omission.

I have an audio essay on this subject on my website (http://adamchristiansen.org/essays/index.html) where I describe my own move from supporting "living wills" to rejection of the assumptions that we make concerning life and death issues.

In Christ,
[email protected]
www.adamchristiansen.org


_________________
Adam Christiansen

 2005/3/29 23:15Profile
Matt25
Member



Joined: 2004/3/19
Posts: 69
Athens Ga

 Re:

Quote:
There's nothing unfortunate about it. Scripture tells us that she is bonded to her husband in a way she never was to her own family. The two of them ARE ONE! It is unfortunate that YOU want to disregard scripture and place her parents wishes above that of her husband which God says they are joined together...one mind, one body. You attempt to set an EXTRAORDINARLY DANGEROUS PRECIDENT in this country by wanting to allow courts to tell loving spouses that their parents' wishes will override theirs whenever it comes down to it.



Yes, and in God’s eyes adultery dissolves that bond:

Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

I'm the one at odds with scripture? It's hard for me to understand your lack of perception on this issue.

Quote:
And there are just as many (more in fact) doctors, lawyers, politicians and citizens (70% of US citizens according to every poll if you want to use that ridiculous group as some sort of qualifier) who think she IS in a vegetative state. Your point?



The majority of Americans also believe abortion should be legal. For 200 years the majority believed slavery was OK and supported segregation. The majority of America also profess to be Christians, although America resembles modern day Sodom and Gomorrah. Wasn't it Billy Graham's wife who said God would have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah if he doesn't judge America (obviously implying America is enveloped in open sin). But in response to those "objective" polls, you may find these articles interesting:
[url=http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=6942]ABC Schiavo Poll Distorted[/url]
[url=http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2005/03/schaivo_push_po.html]Schiavo Poll Distortion[/url]

Also, The CNN/Gallup Poll stated that 60% sided with Schiavo's husband on the issue. 70% disagreed with Congress intervening with the judicial process. Those are two separate issues. I don't believe I'm going out on a limb here when I choose to believe that more than a few people have relied solely on the big 3 news networks for info on this case. And I know I'm not going out on a limb to suggest that the major news networks have given mainly one side of this issue. There have been numerous articles written about this and I'm sure you are proficient enough to Google it.

Quote:
I didn't say she's STILL on life support. I said the assertation that she "has never been on life support" is flat out wrong. She has. Immediately after her accident it was necessary to save her life.



THANK YOU FOR ADMITTING SHE WAS NOT ON LIFE SUPPORT WHEN THE JUDGE FORCED WITHHOLDING OF FOOD AND WATER.

Quote:
Because it's "LETTING HER DIE" (that's a statement of fact) as opposed to killing her.



You are on very shaky ground here. We're going on 12 days and she's still alive. Starving someone to death is not "letting them die". Starving someone to death is killing them! Punishment or death by starvation has been outlawed in every civilized country in the world and is outlawed by the Geneva convention. It's why we have lethal injection or electric chairs vs letting death row inmates die by starvation. If you were to withhold food from a baby or an elderly person in a nursing home who is bound to a wheelchair and can not adequately feed themselves you certainly wouldn't make the same argument. Terri's body was completely self sufficient other than the process of getting food down her throat into her stomach to be digested. Her parents want rehabilitation but MICHAEL SCHIAVO HAS ALLOWED NO REHABILITATION SINCE 1993. Before he stopped the rehabilitation she was marked by the doctors as IMPROVING. You should scroll back through these posts and read Hulsey's timeline which he posted. Very enlightening.

Quote:
For all legal intents and purposes Terri was found to have said she would not want to live like this. MOST AMERICANS...PROBABLY YOURSELF INCLUDED FEEL THE SAME WAY... Yet in hypocrisy at its finest, I've seen Christian after Christian admit that they would not want to be kept alive in this condition...



Thank you so much for deciding what I or any of my family would want if I were in Terri’s position. This is after all what’s at the heart of the issue. You and all of the other Solomons of our day deciding Terri doesn’t meet a certain “quality of life” standard so let’s just “let her die”. Who does life belong to? You? Me? Oh that’s right, God owns all life:
1Co 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
1Co 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

I am not an advocate for keeping terminally ill patients where death is immediately imminent without life support (you know they type…you flip a switch and they’re gone in 3 seconds). I do believe that some can be overzealous in their desire to keep loved ones alive when there really is nothing more to hope for. Terri’s case is not one of those cases and anyone doing the research with an open heart can see that. She was expected to live into her 70’s and there are doctors (the family has 33 of them named) who believe she can improve upon her condition.

Quote:
How many people died and went to Hell because of the Christians camped outside a woman's hospice when they could have been out soulwinning?



swsojourner answered that one for me

Quote:
Well then there's absolutely no point in continuing the discussion, is there, Matt?



I said you can't convince me of her husband's motives. We are still debating the issue of her being allowed to starve to death.

Quote:
As I've told my wife, I'll be glad when Terri's dead.



Her condition is tragic. Your attitude towards her family who wants her to stay alive and anyone else who advocates not starving her to death is even more so.

Quote:
For all intents and purposes, if Terri were walking, talking and perfectly "Normal" and decided to "starve" herself to death this would be a non-issue. Well legally speaking Terri has expressed her wishes to be LEFT TO DIE in this condition. That means starvation. It was her choice and I'm more for leaving her to it than leaving her "alive" like this.



Oh really she has? Please Google this or read back over Hulsey's timeline so you can learn when the "death wish" was brought into the equation (1997) by her adulterous husband. Everything about Michael Schiavo's motives are questionable and to hide behind "well the judge believed him" is a joke. American judges are making horrible decisions everyday in this country. Judge Greer has made quite a few horrible decisions himself. One led to the death of an innocent woman. Please read: [url=http://www.theempirejournal.com/021705sj_schiavo_judge_greer_tur.htm]The all wise Judge Greer[/url]


_________________
Matt M.

 2005/3/30 0:48Profile
Matt25
Member



Joined: 2004/3/19
Posts: 69
Athens Ga

 Re:

For those of you who keep stating things like "the Law says this" and "legally they're still married" and "the courts have determined she's in PVT and needs to die"....it is awfully easy to compare that attitude with the attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees don't you think?

Was not their main flaw that they were incessantly adherent to the Law but their hearts were always far from God's will?? Was that not always the Pharisees main complaint with Jesus? Everytime we see a Pharisee or Sadducee enter the picture they were lashing out at Jesus because he didn't follow the Law.

Forgive me, but I can't help but see a striking parallel here.


_________________
Matt M.

 2005/3/30 1:36Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy