The Terri Schiavo Thread

“sarge, you are the one who said it wasn't irrelevant. I am saying it is.

again death=state of being dead..she is brain dead.
She is a vegetable laying there. I don't call that living.

How is what I said pathetic. It is a fair statement.”

“Are you related to the prosecutor?”

“mtnsteve - You have several times now brought up the length of time I have been married as if that would affect my judgement. Nuff said.

Ewker - What I was saying was that it is irrelevant to my argument. If you think it is relevant to yours, fine, but I have not read anything by you that suggests that when he had an affair will determine if he can claim spousal control over her. For your question, refer to what I said immediately after "That's truly pathetic." I kept it as one paragraph for a reason.”

“OK, so you admit I never said you were not qualified to discuss this, you just assumed thats what I meant.

I asked once how long you had been married, not several times.

You seem to have a problem with stating the facts.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:20:10 PM”

“sarge, then you haven't read everything I post. from an above post:

His affair doesn't even play into this. they are legally married and the say is his, not her parents.”
Ewker
11:35:34 PM
3/19/05

that gives him spousal control over her.

as far as my statement. I still don't see how it is pathetic. I said I applaud you if you do it. But you don't know what you will do in the future. You can only think you will do what is right for you and your wife.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:23:37 PM”

“mtnsteve - Ok. You win. You never said the words "you are not qualified to discuss this". Apparently you are just making small talk in between the rest of the discussion on here.

So ... mtnsteve ... see any good movies lately? have you ever pulled the feeding tube from your wife? nice weather we're having! how many experiences do you have cheating on your wife? ever been to Canada?”

“Moot point, but here goes, he could have divorced her before he cheated on her no matter how long he said she did not want to have sex with him. I am gathering she didn't from statements made here. I'm sure there are lots of marriages where people don't have sex and the marriage still goes on, so that's no reason to cheat, get a divorce.

If the woman left instructions to not be kept alive, then it's her will they are following and not the husbands. God only knows you would not want to put it in his hands at this point where he is dating someone.

From what I am gathering here, she had a heart attack from an eating disorder. I don't know if you can say that basically she killed herself on purpose. Do people with eating disorders have a will to live or want to live? I don't think you can say an eating disorder is not also a mental disorder.

A question would be is what state of mind was she in when she decided she did not want to be on life support? Couldn't the husband or parents keep her from making herself so ill? I'm not sure if you can. Maybe you can force someone into a hospital to be fed intravenously. I'm looking into her background here.

If she wanted to be "let go", and the law says it's her right, then I think they should respect her rights over the husbands and the parents, but her decision to be "let go" should have been made by her while she was mentally sane or I don't know if you can really rely on words of a mentally ill person.

Perhaps she set herself up to die by the eating disorder, then with instructions that she be taken off of life support. We are not allowed in this society to kill ourselves, so maybe her wish to be taken off of life support is just her way of reaching out when she can no longer talk and make someone kill her.”

“Ewker - first you say your point is it is relevant(2:06:30 PM), then you say it doesn't even play into this (2:21:53 PM). Makes a lot of sense.”

“Your funny....in a sad, kinda pathetic way.

I like the, how many experiences do you have cheating on your wife...thats rich.

Actually, just one. I hope you learn from your mistakes. I learned from mine. I also hope you marriage lasts 37 years.

You got some growing up to do boy.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:30:20 PM”

“lipstick - The whole problem here is that there is no evidence that she left instructions to die other than the word of the man who is committing adultry and having children with another woman.”

“Dear Congress persons and Senate people...

I may be writing on behalf of the cosmetics industry. We have a some new products that need testing. Because prior legislation has made testing on amimals illegal, we have been waiting for an oportunity to try our products on a live human subject. She wont feel her eyes burning. She won't feel the blisters on her lips. Even if she could, she wouldn't be able to communicate it. She will be compensated well for her work, which will help offset the overwhelming costs of her voracious appetite. Please consider no debate on this bill during this weekends special session.”

“mtnsteve - You have some non-ad hominem using debate learing to do, boy.

If "growing up" means excusing adultry, then I want my woobie back.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:37:34 PM”

“goat - I love it! LOL”

“It doesn't mean excusing it....when did I ever say that? The fact that you don't know the difference between excusing it and learning from it only shows how much growing up you have to do. You are thinking with the wrong head.”

“Actually sarge... what I just wrote makes me sick.
I am very suprised that a guy who is up in arms about a man who sleeps around on his brain dead wife would find any entertainment in that statement.”

“sarge, I may not have said it right so I will restate it.

If he was having an affair before she went into the coma and she knew it she had every chance to divorce him. So we can assume either she knew and didn't want to divorce him or didn't know. So in a way it is revelant and ilrevelant

All of that doesn't matter because they are still legally married. It doesn't matter if he had 14 affairs. He still has spousal control per the law.”

“mtnsteve - This is my last response to you. You seem to think you have nothing more to learn and so much to teach me. The fact of the matter is I know that learning from your mistakes is very important. But, and I am going to say this one last time to you, THIS GUY IS STILL MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE AND SHOWS NO REMORSE. By your very argument you should see that he is in the wrong. HE HAS NOT LEARNED FROM HIS MISTAKE! HE IS STILL DOING IT AND IS PROUD OF IT! Why this isn't sinking in, I don't know. But I'm done with you, your straw man, and your ad hominem arguments.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:48:15 PM”

“goat - What I love about it is not what would result if that were a true letter (it's obviously a spoof), but how it demonstrates the absurdity of these people arguing that she is brain dead, and therefore - dead. Nobody in their right mind would write or consider such a letter because it is absolutely cruel and inhumane treatment of a living human being.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:46:10 PM”

“Ewker - I have not seen (although there may be evidence I have not seen) ANY evidence that she willingly stayed married to him while he cheated on her and had children with another woman. If that happened, please provide a link so I can reconsider my view.

The reason they are still married is because she cannot divorce him. If you can show me evidence that she stayed married to him BEFORE being in a coma while he was having affairs and out of wedlock children, I will gladly side with the husband's right to decide her fate.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:50:20 PM”

“Legally, they are still married. Breaking a vow or a God's law has nothing to do with this case on this earth. Mans law rules here. This shouldn't be an open debate. Evidently, she never wanted to be kept alive with a machine. How about honoring someones wishes.”

“I bet she'd still flash that silly smile if she was ever to meet her husbands children.
last edited: 3/20/05 1:57:25 PM”

“goat - evidently you either completely missed the point, or ignored it. The reason to not "honor her wishes" is because the only evidence that it was her wish comes from her adulterous husband.

Your sick "silly smile" comment inadvertantly exposed your position that she is not able to make logical decisions for herself .... like to get a divorce from an adulterous husband.
last edited: 3/20/05 2:02:03 PM”

“The footage I've seen on the television shows no smile at all. To me, it looks like she is crying out, "UNPLUG ME OR I'LL DIVORCE YOU".
I ain't even paying attention to your foolish adultry arguement. But maybe it is time I do.
Please fill me in... what is the religious background of the Shivo family?”

“Sarge, the same applies to you. can you show any evidence that she didn't know? How do you know that she wants to divorce him now.
It is all speculation on both our parts.

What matters and is fact is that he does have spousal control in this matter.

Now until you can prove he doesn't have spousal control it is a moot point. Your opinion doesn't matter. You have to have proof that he doesn't have it. Do you?”

“goat - She's Roman Catholic.”

“Sarge argues that he shouldn't have spousal control because the guy slept with another woman while he was married. Perhpas the Shivo's had an open relationship. Perhaps they were Mormon. Perhaps even no religion at all. In any case, the arguement of loosing spousal control because of adultry really sucks. Your religion is better than mine.”

“oh... Ummm, Roman Catholic. Gee, I've never known a Roman Catholic who screwed around. Like I said many posts ago... 3 Hail Marry's and a large donation. Mr Shivo is a good man!

We need bodies for the new crusade... Procreate! Procreate!!
last edited: 3/20/05 2:25:44 PM”

“Ewker - Quite simply, nothing has been stated to demonstrate that he was being adultrous before the coma.

Your statement that the bottom line is that he legally is still her husband completely dismissed the fact that she cannot divorce him by her own decision.

Here is a hypothetical question - Suppose a woman was hit by a car and could no longer speak or physically move by herself, including communicate in any way, although she could think clearly. Her husband has sex with other women right in front of her. Do you have a problem with that? I mean, she isn't divorcing him, ... she's just watching. He's never done that before the accident. She's a Roman Catholic. Is he a good man? Is he somebody you'd let your daughter marry? Is he your kind a guy?

(ps - In case it isn't clear, that hypothetical is to answer your "legally married" argument.)
last edited: 3/20/05 2:33:42 PM”

“goat - I didn't realize you were trolling. Sorry for wasting the time.”

“sarge, now you are trolling by your hypothetical question.

other than the affair which doesn't matter tell me why he doesn't have spousal control. Not your opinion but pure hard fact.”

“Exactly what I've been trying to get at Ewker!
I just happen to take a more or less entertaining path.”

“Sarge

You make up crap when it suits you boy...when did I ever say or even imply..


You seem to think you have nothing more to learn and so much to teach me.

You are being so defensive it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Makes one wonder.............”

“Hey mtnsteve... Your photo album...
9 of 19 "the bar"
To the left of the Coors Light, is that a bottle of Woodford Reserve!!
last edited: 3/20/05 3:03:46 PM”

“awww Wooford Reserve...yum”

“Ewker - an analogy is a troll? Really? Since when? Why won't you answer the question?

I never argued he doesn't legally have control over her, did I? Where did I argue that? It's as if you completely ignored my argument. Should I repeat it for the, what?, 30th time? He SHOULD NOT have spousal control over her. That's my argument. Not that he doesn't have it.

Is this thing on?”

“goat - Ironically your arguments backed up the opposition.

1. That its incredibly sick to think we can treat her as if she were dead. and
2. That she is incapable of making rational decisions for herself, like whether or not to divorce an adultrous husband.

You're the football player running full speed past all of the defensive lines to the end zone ... going the wrong way down the field.
last edited: 3/20/05 3:09:12 PM”

“And why shouldn't he? The law says he does.”

“Why shouldn't he? Because if he were to bring his bastard children into the room with her, she'd smile instead of recognizing what was going on there, as you so elegantly explained already.”

“Would this be the picture you are referring to?

If so, you are correct. Brought by a good friend from back east to the festivities. Good eye.”

“You didn't see my "smile" comment as entertainment.
She has no smile, only a pathetic stare. Her brain is jelly.

Ironicly, my sick words were making light of the fact that she is brain dead. Lets use her as an experiment. Lets see how long we can keep her body functioning without brain activity.

Her wishes were to not be kept alive with a machine. It is not illegal to sleep with someone other than your spouse. The husband has guardianship.”

“Yes, that would be the one... I can spot that bottle from across the bar at the best of pubs.

Good Whiskey!! Your good friend has great taste.”

“sarge,
Lets stick to facts shall we. The fact is he has spousal control. Mine or your opinion means nothing. Do you argee with that.”

“No, I don't agree with that. We are not debating this because our argument will decide the case. We are simply expressing our personal views.

You and "the goat" have said that "the fact" is that "legally" he has spousal control. No kidding. We've been through this. (take deep breath) All I am saying (again) is that he should not have that right. She CANNOT divorce him because she is INCAPABLE.

It's as if you not only disagree with me, but you don't even want to recognize my point of view. I have to keep repeating it. Why is that? Do you not understand my point? You (guys) keep asking the same things over and over again and each time I basically say the same thing.

http://www.singalongwithme.com/wheels/”

“sarge, I know what your stance is. Problem is it means nothing except to you.

I am looking at the facts not opinions while you want to argue your opinion. No one will change that.


How do you know she wants to divorce him???? Is that stated some where or is that your opinion again. If it is your opinion then no one can change your mind on that.”

“I recognize your point of view and have all along.
He is an adultorer so therefore should not have spousal rights.

Legally, being an adultorer does not remove the right to be the guardian.
Pull your arse out of the religious band wagon and look at this from the legal viewpoint.
Your opinion still matters, but has no grounds in this case.”

“If we would have always lived only by laws that are existing on the books, we wouldn't have any laws.

When there is not a law to answer to a specific situation on the books, that is when debate becomes necessary. I am debating.

I am arguing that she is not divorced because she cannot divorce.

That does not mean there should not be a law to correct that oversight.

Gore tried to win the 2000 election by changing the law - after the fact - that he felt was unfair. Did he have a case? By your logic, you would say no, he did not have a case. The law is the law. Is that how each of you felt in that election?”

“Ewker: "How do you know she wants to divorce him?"

How do you know she wants to die?

Your argument is that he says so, and, as her husband, he can legally decide that.

I am simply stating that it is questionable whether or not that is the case. The man does not have her best interests at heart. He has HIS best interests at heart. He cannot be trusted in my opinion.

If he dressed her up in a clown outfit and pranced her around town in that state singing "Send in the clowns" would you still think he should be able to make a life and death decision on her life? It's legal what he'd be doing. But RATIONAL people recognize that if he isn't acting as a husband, he shouldn't be making that determination. It's not that the law states he can do it - it's that there is NO law addressing this particular issue where a legally married woman cannot defend herself and stick up for her rights to divorce an adultrous husband when she is being made a fool of, or worse yet, being put to death.
last edited: 3/20/05 4:05:08 PM”

“sarge, again you are stating your opinons. She is brain dead. He has the right to pull the feeding tube.

This is more about facts than opinions. You have a right to express your opinions right or wrong.

I am out of here for a while. Have a good rest of the day sarge”

“Ewker - No kidding. Isn't that the point of a political discussion on an internet chat board? To express your opinions? I am very glad you approve of me expressing mine. Thank you sir.

Forgive me if I failed to recognize that you were a judge and I was actually literally pleading her case in front of you for a final decision.

(You forgot to slam your mallet before you left the courtroom.)


last edited: 3/20/05 5:04:39 PM”

“hehehe, I must have struck a nerve with ya.”