WABC radio's stream might not work. Try using another stream from Drudge's list at...

www.drudgereport.com

...if WABC radio's steam doesn't work.

Posted by: JWL at March 20, 2005 10:11 PM

has he played it yet!?! All I hear is ads!

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 20, 2005 10:19 PM

I just tuned in. Has the clip of Terri been played yet?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:19 PM

audio clip is available here:
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=NW05C05
..bit slow to d/l though, obviously getting lots of hits (I'm still waiting download to complete).
Audio will be played on air shortly.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 10:20 PM

Hasn't been played yet. Any second now!

Posted by: JWL at March 20, 2005 10:21 PM

It is about to play. The internet feed is a few minutes lagged.

On a side note, I'm watching CSPAN. Interesting to see who is lining up on each side of the issue.

Posted by: Snowy Owl at March 20, 2005 10:22 PM

On now!!!

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:23 PM

Apparently Drudge is playing it after this ad break.. basically minutes away.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 10:25 PM

Drudge: "What nutty husband doesn't want to keep his wife alive?"

Right on!

Now he's reading the AP article.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:25 PM

I will have the audio for download minutes after it is played.

http://www.austinsblog.com

Thanks Drudge!!!

Posted by: Austin at March 20, 2005 10:25 PM

listending now, he's gone to a break and after that he'll play.

aarrgh, the ad is larry king hawking orange juice!

Posted by: Teri J at March 20, 2005 10:25 PM

Here comes the clip!

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:26 PM

Going to be emotional.

Posted by: Jessica at March 20, 2005 10:28 PM

Oh my God, how could a "brain dead" person make so much noise?! It sounds like she's trying to talk!!

Posted by: JWL at March 20, 2005 10:28 PM

She's groaning. Several seconds long. It sounds like she's trying to talk, but can't make any consonant sounds.

Her dad asked her to say Hi. She made a sound like uhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaiiiii.

I've got tears in my eyes.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:29 PM

For those of you who are having trouble with liquid audio, try disabling any add block software.

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 20, 2005 10:32 PM

That ain't brain dead. I've heard politicians make less sense than that.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 10:32 PM

LOL!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: MoFiZiX Gr4FiX at March 20, 2005 10:34 PM

1-866-4DRUDGE, or send him an instant message. He's reading the IMs on the air now.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:36 PM

Audio is up.

http://www.austinsblog.com

God Bless Terri!

Posted by: Austin at March 20, 2005 10:37 PM

http://libsyn.com/media/catholic/terriresponses.mp3

download as much as you'd like!

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 20, 2005 10:39 PM

Mary - what's his IM or ICQ?

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 10:43 PM

I have the audio up at http://view.web-nuts.com/index.php?p=1369

Posted by: Patrick at March 20, 2005 10:44 PM

talk about biased, one-sided, sensational journalism....................................
----------
what nutty husband would want to be continuelly tormented inside while watching his wife lying there lifelessly and only living by the means of a tube? I think Micheal is being unfairly judged at and people who's biased would probalby says that he becomes a respiratory therapist in order to secretly assasinate his wife.

The decision to let Terry is go is now the court's and no longer in the husband's power. He no longer can say yes or not to removal. Even if he changes his mind now, he cannot do anything to save Terry, so stop saying that it's he who wants Terry dead, it's the court right now.

I believe that the court has decided that those "responses" are just reflexes. This fact has been reviewed by two courts.

The trial court heard testimony from five experts: two selected by Michael, two selected by the Schindlers, and one independent expert selected by the trial court. The two experts selected by Michael and the independent expert agreed that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state and that her actions were limited to mere reflexes. The two experts chosen by the Schindlers disagreed, but the trial court found their positions not credible. For instance, the trial court explained:

At first blush, the video of Terry Schiavo appearing to smile and look lovingly at her mother seemed to represent cognition. This was also true for how she followed the Mickey Mouse balloon held by her father. The court has carefully viewed the videotapes as requested by counsel and does find that these actions were neither consistent nor reproducible. For instance, Terry Schiavo appeared to have the same look on her face when Dr. Cranford rubbed her neck. Dr. Greer testified she had a smile during his (non-videoed) examination. Also, Mr. Schindler tried several more times to have her eyes follow the Mickey Mouse balloon but without success. Also, she clearly does not consistently respond to her mother. The court finds that based on the credible evidence, cognitive function would manifest itself in a constant response to stimuli.

The experts also disagreed about whether any treatment could improve Terri's condition. The two experts selected by the Schindlers each proposed a potential therapy method, but the trial court rejected both of them based on "the total absence of supporting case studies or medical literature."

The court opinions indicate that similar videos were viewed in their entirety by the trial court, which found that Terri's actions were no more than reflexive and could not be reproduced with any consistency. The Second District affirmed that decision.

By the way, any of you actually read the complete ruling yet? Extracts are so dangerous especially from the media (that's how cults are formed, by taking out sentences they want and inteprete them as they wish)

I found that Abstract Appeals(http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html) has the most un-biased facts and also links to the actual decision by the court. Please educate yourself in this respect if you haven't. It certainly opened my eyes.

Posted by: will at March 20, 2005 10:50 PM

Sorry, demonsurfer, I'm looking high and low for Drudge's IM/ICQ and can't find it!!! I'll keep looking. You can e-mail him at drudge@drudgereport.com, if that helps.

Now he's changed topics. The show is still interesting, though.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:50 PM

Look, Will, no MRI, PET, or SPECT scan was ever done on Terri.

Everybody: Drudge is back to the Terri topic again.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 10:52 PM

I am proud to be in Fortenberry's district. :)

But some of these guys are wack. Those Florida reps need to review some of their state laws. Especially about adultery and PVS and guardianship laws.

Posted by: ElizabethV at March 20, 2005 10:53 PM

thanks for the information Mary, I'll be checking on that right now.

Thanks for enlighten me. It's always better to know more.

Posted by: will at March 20, 2005 10:54 PM

Couldn't find Drudge on ICQ.com. Still looking...

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 11:03 PM

Will,

Your comments themselves speak volumes to your complete lack of objectivity. You say, "wife lying their lifelessly." Really? She's not alive? I listened to the audiotape. While I cannot determine what she's trying to say, I do perceive she's trying to communicate.

Just as I can also say that while an eighteen-month-old may not be able to vocalize syllables to my understanding, she's still trying to communicate. Or that a dog, even, that is making that tell-tale movement that only I understand, is trying to communicate.

If I withdrew nutrition and hydration from the former it would be called murder, and from the latter, animal cruelty.

You don't afford Terri the same respect as you would a toddler or even a dog.

You also say, "only living by means of a tube." Wow. I guess that since life in Terri's state is so worthless, we should go ahead and withdraw nutrition and hydration from EVERYONE who is fed and hydrated by a tube.

Including all the people who go about their daily lives unable to swallow and depend on this kind of treatment. Heck, let's include everyone post-surgery and be done with it. Rip the IV's right out of their arms!

Posted by: Robert Baker at March 20, 2005 11:04 PM

abstract appeal has the facts distorted. It says Dr. Greer. Its JUDGE GREER.

This case will be a victory for the pro-death people if Terri is allowed to die. I doubt she said "Starve me and then feel free to sleep and have sex with another woman without divorcing me first".

Posted by: ElizabethV at March 20, 2005 11:14 PM

seems only CAT scan is performed and reviewed by the courts. Correct me if wrong for the following definitions

CAT: It is an x-ray procedure which combines many x-ray images with the aid of a computer to generate cross-sectional views and, if needed, three-dimensional images of the internal organs and structures of the body.

PET: PET scanning provides information about the body's chemistry not available through other procedures. Unlike CT (computerized tomography) or MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), techniques that look at anatomy or body form, PET studies metabolic activity or body function. PET has been used primarily in cardiology, neurology, and oncology.

MRI: similar to CAT, The image and resolution is quite detailed and can detect tiny changes of structures within the body, particularly in the soft tissue, brain and spinal cord, abdomen and joints.

SPECT: A SPECT Scan is capable of providing information about blood flow to tissue. It is a sensitive diagnostic tool used to detect stress fracture, spondylosis, infection (e.g. discitis), and tumor (e.g. osteoid osteoma). Analyzing blood flow to an organ (e.g. bone) may help to determine how well it is functioning.

since CAT, which provides structural image of the body, shows that the structure is already distroyed. Performing other scans seems pointless and may be the reason that they are not performed.

PET scan: if a egg is broken, it has no chemistry action left

MRI scan: provides the same anatomical information as CAT

SPECT: Each of the room has collapses but the plumbing is still working. The working of plumbing doesn't prove the rooms are intact.

Second district court ruling extract.

Over the span of this last decade, Theresa's brain has deteriorated because of the lack of oxygen it suffered at the time of the heart attack. By mid 1996, the CAT scans of her brain showed a severely abnormal structure. At this point, much of her cerebral cortex is simply gone and has been replaced by cerebral spinal fluid. Medicine cannot cure this condition. Unless an act of God, a true miracle, were to recreate her brain, Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state, totally dependent upon others to feed her and care for her most private needs. She could remain in this state for many years.

Posted by: will at March 20, 2005 11:15 PM

Will: we should create a ranking scale. We'll measure everyone's brain function and power and rank their worth as a human being based on the degree of cognition. Close to 0, and they get the axe, so to speak. Sound like a plan?!?!

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 20, 2005 11:21 PM

MDRUDGE on AIM

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 11:25 PM

From Larry King Live:

M. SCHIAVO: "It is uncomprehensible that a government can walk all over somebody's private judicial matter, because of their own personal feelings."

POINT---What is a "private" judicial matter? Once something goes to court, it becomes part of the public record. For example, in bankruptcy, your "private" finances and other records go on public display. Marriages, births and divorces go on the public record. What does "private judicial matter" mean exactly. Private (personal, friend, etc.) judge?

M. SCHIAVO: "What I'm here for tonight is I'm going to tell you -- I feel like the government has just trampled all over my personal life."

POINT---Couldn't a murderer also say that the government trampled all over their personal life too. What about Terri's personal life. What about her real family's personal life?? How could M. Schiavo even talk about Terri being remotely connected with his "personal life" any longer when M. Schiavo is already married to another woman (common law) and they have had to kids together (according to the public record)?

The only logical conclusion is that M. Schiavo wants Terri dead for some unknown reason, and from some of the affidavits I've read (in the public record again), maybe the reason's really not so unknown.

Posted by: G M McLaughlin at March 20, 2005 11:26 PM

Jayson, sounds like a plan. And blonde haired, blue eyed people can get extra points. Seig Heil, Fuhrer Wexler!

Posted by: JWL at March 20, 2005 11:27 PM

"Theresa will always remain in an unconscious, reflexive state"
She's not unconscious! WTF? Look on the video links on this very website - that is NOT an unconscious non-responsive person. Damn, how can people be so blind when it's right in front of their face?

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 20, 2005 11:29 PM

Will, my understanding is that the statement that "the cortex is gone and has been replaced by fluid" is not provable by CAT scan only. That's why the more advanced tests were needed. Why did Michael Schiavo refuse them? What harm could there be in performing an MRI? We just don't know enough yet.

For me, the fact that Michael refused even simple things like antibiotics for Terri is highly suspicious. If my husband were brain-damaged (God forbid!), I would want all possible tests done on him, because I love him and I would want to know as accurately as possible what his condition was. MRIs don't hurt, and they're not prohibitively expensive. So what's up with Michael refusing them?

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 11:29 PM

thanks Robert, for responding to my comments.

Yes, I cannot claim that I am objective, but at least I am trying to be. Please forgive me if I may sound tilted to one side or another.

Your "percives" also points out that it's your opinion that she's alive and thus not objective. Just as I can say that when a tree is about to fall down, the cracking sound from it's branch is a cry for help, you can say that those are sounds of communication. Remember, a baby, or a dog is reacting to you, not to a random stimuli. The court has ruled that Terry's reaction is not consistant nor directional (to others or to her parents).

I am hurt that you felt I do not respect Terry. I believe you do not have the necessary information on this matter and I would really appreciate if you would just refrain from using the "respect" word. It's quite meaningless, similar to "racist" or "political correctness".

As to your suggestion that I am actually in favor of removing the tube from everyone who is living by a feeding tube, I believe you have grossly generalized or even exaggerated in emotion. If i am to cut down a tree in my lawn doesn't mean I would like to cut down all the tree in the world.

The question today is not that whether or not Terry should live or die. It's more of whether or not it's our business to pay so much attention to this. As I have often stated to people that "We are all strangers to both families." You are too. You would believe that you are in the midst of it all because you may have read the news reports, the rulings and saw the tapes but you know nothing of Terry herself or the families. If you were to summoned today to stand in court to testify on Terry's behave, will people view you as a credible witness, althought you have never talked or even seen Terry?

Then on what grounds do you have a say in this matter?

-----------
Thanks for pointing that out, maybe you could send the webmaster at abstract appeals and ask him or her to correct it.

However, just because of that one mistake, Abastract appeals would have its "fact distorted" is like saying "This oven's indicator lights are broken, therefore this oven must be broken."

We call this "the incompleteness as a proof of defect" in logical errors.

----------

I am reading some great inputs from everyone, I want to thank again for all the new information handed to me. It's always better to know more then know less.

Posted by: will at March 20, 2005 11:37 PM

I agree with Will!! I wish more people would open up their minds and understand what is going on here. Unbelievable that you people are so blind sided by the media. People make life and death decisions all the time, so are they also abusers, evil and have alterior motives, c'mom people, open your eyes. God already sentenced Terri to death and pure human selfishness (peg tube) has kept her alive!! This should be a private matter and his choice only. let terri move into peace and out of death.

Posted by: SUSAN at March 20, 2005 11:38 PM

Will:

Please educate yourself about Terri's condition:

http://www.blogsforterri.com/archives/2005/03/medical_facts_a.php#more

Just because a court makes declarations doesn't make them true!

Posted by: Bryan at March 20, 2005 11:42 PM

Amen to that, Susan. For Heaven's sake...it's been 15 years. I am sorrowful for the state that Terri is in, but wouldn't she be so much happier moving on to Heaven?

Posted by: tiffany at March 20, 2005 11:44 PM

The brain is truely the final frontier. As much as there is much known about the functions of the brain there is much more that is a mystery. Studies have shown that that the brain works to reroute the signals when the receiving end is damaged. X-rays don't show signals. I personally knew a girl in therapy with my husband who lost half her brain and she was a higher level of ability then my husband. Ever hear of a lobotomy? It was the removal of part of the brain yet the person still functioned.

Posted by: Caryn at March 20, 2005 11:50 PM

Can we vote Will the troll off the island yet?

Posted by: Ruth at March 20, 2005 11:55 PM

Tiffany, yes, I agree with you, yes! For someone to be mentally retarted for 15 years is 15 to long! Let's do them all a favor! Kill Kill Kill!

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 20, 2005 11:55 PM

Jayson,
Please do not grossly exaggerate my opinion. I don't believe you know what you are saying. I certainly hope that you don't believe that if I ever knowingly crushed an ant, that would makes me anti-life and the demon that will destory all life on earth.

I find that people are linking this case to every other scenerio. We are not judging case by case?
----------
JWL,
I found your reference to Nazi offensive and sickening. Please don't do that anymore.
----------
demonsufer,
Please finish reading my post and pay close attention on the uni-direction reflex. Ever saw a venus fly trap? You touch it, it closes as a reflex. I haven't heard anyone claim that they are conciouse.
----------
GM,
the so called "private" means, un-affliated persons or groups. For example, when a car accident insurance claim is being heard in the court, the party are the drivers, the insurance company and the witness. People such as you who might be thousands of miles away from this accident are not considered to be affliated party. In this case, the affliated party are Terry, husband, parents, friends and families. You, me, Bush brothers, Capital Hill and other Americans are not. I certainly hope that no complete stranger can run into the court yelling, "I saw him kill that guy," and is taken as credible evidence while that stranger is thousands miles away while the murder happened.

------------
Mary,
I see, that I did not know. Thanks for the new information. In my personal opinion, it IS suspecious that no other tests are done. But I also wonder if the court has other evidence that they went through without mentioning it.

I mean, if you know that statement is not provable just by CAT scan alone, how come the defending party, Terry's parents' lawyer didn't bring it up? Not to mention that many other doctors has went through the medical file, not just the husband's doctor. Or was there some other supporting evidence besides the CAT scan?

-------------
I have to say I am suspecious in many ways but I am also neither a judge, lawyer, medical professionals, Terry's husband or parents. Do I really know enough to make any kind of judgement on this case.

Of course I am entitled to my opinion, but should we allow opinion to affect a court's ruling?

Posted by: will at March 20, 2005 11:57 PM

Will,

I said that I "perceive" she is trying to communicate. That's it--just a perception. Your leap from my discussion of her ability to communicate to your discussion of whether she's "alive" or not plays your hand: you don't think she is.

Courts are NOT in the business of determining whether a person is alive or dead. That's the responsibility of the medical community. If you, for example, were to go into Mrs. Schiavo's room right now and put a pillow over her face until she smothered to death, you would be tried for murder. Why? Because she is alive.

My suggestion of of denying food and water to ANYONE through a tube was a rhetorical device to drive your assertions to the extreme. Quite simply, you do not believe Terri is alive, which is evidenced (as you seem to believe) by her inability to receive nourishment in the traditional manner.

That we are "outsiders" and not family members in the matter does not negate the responsibility you or I have as members of the broader community of ensuring that our weakest members are provided the basics of human needs--including food and water--not to mention impartial treatment under the law.

Your use of arborial metaphor, "felling a tree," in describing Terri's case is, sadly, quite telling.

Posted by: Robert Baker at March 20, 2005 11:58 PM

Dr. Sanja Gupta says there is no test that will show in an absolute fashion that Terri Schiavo is in a Persistent Vegetative State. No test exists that can remove all doubt, it is that simple. The courts said they determined that it was Terri’s wish to not live under such conditions. Yet her immediate family refutes that idea. We are to believe that Terri made her wishes known to her husband and possibly a couple of members of his family when she was in her early to mid 20’s, yet not shared these wishes with her family. Michael nor anyone else made any mention of these supposed desires for 8 years and yet this has been a pivotal factor in having Terri’s Schiavo’s feeding tube removed?

Terri’s husband professes his love for her and yet the demands he has made for her care and the things he has denied her does not indicate care for her well being. Over and over the argument has been about Terri’s wishes. Terri and Michael had not been married that long and Michael Schiavo’s questionable behavior during the past 15 years should leave one questioning the validity of his statement. Why would the beliefs of people who have known Terri her entire life not be enough to sway a court of what her wishes likely would be?

So basically there is no absolute proof that Terri is PVS and no absolute proof that she would want to die yet her feeding tube has been removed three times! Her husband has denied her many aspects of compassionate care and there is a debate about what is right for Terri Schiavo? Why is there nobody questioning why her husband is so adamant to have his wife killed and why he would deny her basic comforts and therapy, particularly if he believes she isn’t in there anyway? What should it matter to him? This entire matter needs to be scrutinized very carefully.

In a very low and manipulative move to take the focus off of himself, Michael Schiavo brought up that he thought Congress should focus on keeping pedophiles who murder little girls off the streets! Using a recent horrific crime to divert attention! The other day he left an interview and his lawyer said it was because he had just found out about this pedophile confessing and it was terribly upsetting to him. Conveniently he had this need to leave to compose himself right at the time he was being asked very difficult questions and the interviewer was not accepting his pat answers and demanded explanations to things yet to be explained by Michael. This news about the pedophile was so upsetting to him that he couldn’t continue with an interview allowing him to get his view out to the nation and stand for what he says he believes in so strongly in the case of his severely disabled wife! There are way too many inconsistencies. This needs to be evaluated very meticulously. Something is not right! Sadly it is entirely possible that the courts may have made mistakes in this case and not had the information that they needed. It happens and courts can make mistakes.

As far as God having made the decision already. You are absolutely right and if you notice, she is still here and all she needs is food and water just like you and me! If he wanted her right now she would be with him.

Posted by: imdll at March 20, 2005 11:58 PM

Actually, I wouldn't call Will a troll. Now we have had some gen-u-wine trolls on other threads!

One minute to midnight on the East Coast...

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 20, 2005 11:59 PM

This is ridiculous... Republican after Republican in the House stands up in favor of Terri, and Democrat after Democrat stands up against Terri. Some of the Dems are trying to play politics, making nonsensical arguments like we shouldn't save Terri because 45 million people don't have health insurance. Don't forget this, pro-Terri Dems.

Posted by: JWL at March 21, 2005 12:01 AM

Will, I'm just extending the underlying logic of your argument. Your implication was that she is braindead, therefore ought to be dead. I, however, think that a human being doesn't even have to even be conscious in order to remain a human being. Is a baby less human simply because it's less aware of its existence? Do we cease to be human when we fall asleep, or get knocked unconscience.

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 21, 2005 12:03 AM

"Please finish reading my post and pay close attention on the uni-direction reflex. Ever saw a venus fly trap? You touch it, it closes as a reflex. I haven't heard anyone claim that they are conciouse." - will

uh-huh.. so by that logic, all babies should be starved until they display signs of cognitive reflex.. yup, if nothing else it'll solve overpopulation problems. Best you don't fall asleep tonight will, someone might mistake you for brain-dead and put you out of your misery.

BTW, do venus fly traps giggle when tickled? Get a clue mate, it seems you are being intentionally obtuse.

Posted by: demonsurfer at March 21, 2005 12:17 AM

This will be my last post.

I am now prohibited to post comments since people feel like I am trolling. I apologize that I am saying things that people do not like hear. I was hoping that everyone here is open enough to have a calm discussion. Yes, I am claiming I am being censored, but that's hopefully understandable.

Althought I know Internet enough to still post on this board and bypass the censorship, I believe it's no longer beneficial to me if people are unwilling to dicuss on the issue with me.

Thank you all for providing me with new information, I especially want to thank Mary, Robert and others who really enlightened me in may ways.

I have some responsed, but not all responses to the post after me. I must apologize not able to give you my feedback but I can't trouble the adminstrator further.

I just want to thank you all again. Cheers, and maybe this turn out in the best of the outcome, whichever it may be.

PS. Mary, if it's possible, could you tell me why I may be a troll? It would really help me next time if I need to do some discussion on other boards.
--------------
Ruth,
I am sorry that you think I am trolling this place. However, I am polite in my tone, open to suggestions and writing valid discussion points. For example, Mary keep on enlighten me with new facts which I try searching the net for new informations.

I am not here to flame or incite anger but merely engaging in a conversation to many others. How could you claim I am trolling? If I am trolling, I would be writting profanity and points without substance in order to make people angry.

However, I have seen some responses to my posts that might be hinting I am anti-life, proponents of "removing tube for everyone", "killing people with mental condition," and maybe a Nazi without providing valid discussion points. Wouldn't you call the flaming or trolling instead of calling me?

This is a place of discussion. This is a place of open-mindness. Writing valid discussion points that you personally do not like to hear is not considered trolling.

I do have to apologize for writing all those discussions that are quite off topic, which is the audio take of Terry. But I am getting so much new information from people's response.
-------------
Bryan,
Yes, the courts aren't always right. I 100% agree with you. Heck, just look at the cases where wrong convictions are made. But would the court know more then we do since that we are not there to heard the testimonies and review the evidences? I am quite certain the answer is yes.

Thank you for the link, I will make haste and read it now.

Posted by: will at March 21, 2005 12:22 AM

Will, thanks for the courteous response. Let me amplify what I said about CAT scans: They use X-rays, which are great at identifying bony structures, but not so great at soft tissue. If you look at a chest X-ray, you'll see the ribs much more clearly than the lungs. Abnormal structures can sometimes be identified by calcification, which makes them show up on an X-ray looking more like bone. (Disclaimer: I am not a medical person -- I''m an engineer.)

This is why we need other methods of imaging besides X-rays. Ultrasound, for example, bounces high-frequency sound waves off surfaces. It works well on soft tissues. MRI uses radio waves and a magnetic field and is very effective for gathering images of soft tissues. This is why an MRI of Terri's brain would be a much more effective diagnostic tool than a CAT scan.

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 12:23 AM

one person complains and you run?

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 21, 2005 12:24 AM

Um, Will, I said you *weren't* a troll. Trolls' posts are characterized by poor spelling, foul and abusive language, and irrelevance to the topic under discussion. Your arguments have been (for the most part) courteous, well written, and on topic.

One thing you might want to do on other boards is to break up your posts so they're shorter.

Oh, if anybody actually wants to write to me, use "vielleplayer" (at) "yahoo" (dot) "com".

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 12:29 AM

One of the primary arguments being proposed is that in such a state as Terri's, life has lost all meaning.

It has become meaningless.
I'm quite certain will and SUSAN would agree.
Michael Schiavo would agree emphatically.

But is that really true? Isn't meaning in life so deeply ingrained with morality that it has prompted this particular national discourse?

I say Terri's life has meaning - a profound meaning which has enormous value. By rejecting the value of Terri's life - the very essence of breath, even by her own admission, every single other life is devalued. That devaluation chips deeply into morality. Life then becomes a commodity at a set price. This person's life is worth something that is measurable, instead of something that is immeasurable. If we truly believe that no greater gift can be given than for someone to lay down their life for others, then we have to understand that unless this death is purely accidental, sacrificial or completely natural, that any other action constitutes an immorality. A debasing of the very meaning of life.

Will, SUSAN - Terri deserves to live until she dies a natural death. Any other approach shatters our cultural integrity. We are incapable of playing God without suffering a precipitous decline in all morality.

Posted by: Chris at March 21, 2005 12:29 AM

Believe me JWL as a democrat, pro choice, caregiver over 15 yrs for my husband who is severely brain damaged, unable to qualify for help all these yrs, with no health insurance , knowing more than most including doctors about brain damage and having just moved to Florida about 1 1/2yrs ago I'm horrified and outraged. I am taping this session and every democrat that spoke and the 1 Republican will here from me!

Posted by: Caryn at March 21, 2005 12:30 AM

Caryn, is there a list of the Congressmen who spoke against the bill? I *really* want to see if mine is on there!!! >:-(

Posted by: Mary in LA at March 21, 2005 12:35 AM

I am terribly sorry. I was just going to quietly read the rest of the responses but Jayson suggested I am running away.

To clarify, I am prohibited by the Administrator of the site to post, not quitting the discussion. If you understand what an IP address is, then you'll understand that the Admin has now prohibitted posts from that single IP, which is me, so I can't post. I'll get a message, "Posting is not allowed from you" something like that when I press the post button.

Again i apologize for using the bypass again, but I guess this proves you can't really silent someone on the Internet if you want to.

sorry.

Posted by: will at March 21, 2005 12:36 AM

I will be the first to vote Will, Susan and Tiffany off the island. They are here to be a nuisance and to put forward the demeaning notion that a person is dead because of some made up definition of the Hemlock Society.

I take it that these people either do not have children or they have not seen their loved ones after they have suffered a stroke.

I will deal with one statement made by Will first. He said that Terri suffered a heart attack. This is not correct, even though that is the impression that Michael Schiavo has given to the MSM. The notion of a heart attack was entertained in the emergency room of the hospital but was discounted when the tests proved that everything was normal. On the other hand there are neurologists (not Dr Death Cranford who knows zip) who have stated that Terri had an anoxic seizure (or words to that effect). One's brain does not get damaged from having a heart attack but it does get damaged when you have a stroke.

So the question that Will needs to discover is exactly why Terri ended up being deprived of oxygen in the first place. The answer to that question could be related to the fact that she has a severe neck injury not unlike the injury received when someone tries to strangle another person. An attempt to asphyxiate someone has the effect of depriving the person of oxygen, thus causing the anoxic episode that has occurred in Terri's case.

For the person who claimed that Terri is lying there helplessly, I suggest that you have a look at the facts again because Terri has been sitting up in bed and in a chair.

She has not lost conciousness either. She is very much alive and she really does try to communicate.

I saw the same thing with my dad. He was left without the power of speech after his second more serious stroke. He managed to communicate by making similar noises. If these alleged experts produced by Greer, Felos and Schiavo are to be believed then my father was dead on the day that he had that stroke. Yet I know differently because I went to visit him and he knew who I was when I arrived at the hospital. I had not seen him in a long time but he knew me. That is how it is with Terri.

When someone is dead that person no longer breathes and all of the bodily functions have shut down. When someone is brain dead, then there is nothing in the way of brain waves that can be measured. Terri breathes on her own, and her brainwaves are functioning.

I, for one, do not accept the definition of death that is put forward by Cranford and his team of bioethicists, especially the "animals are more important than humans" Peter Singer. Bill Allen could not look the interviewer in the face when speaking about Terri because the definitions with which he is working are total hogwash.

It is time for America to wake up and stop the march of the culture of death.

Posted by: Maggie at March 21, 2005 12:37 AM

oh, will, i apologize. you should not have been banned. that's ridiculous.

Posted by: Jayson Franklin at March 21, 2005 12:39 AM

Mary not sure of all names but I'm still taping C-span and I'm sure a list will be posted since they took and electronic vote. The good news is it PASSED!

Posted by: Caryn at March 21, 2005 12:49 AM

THE BILL HAS PASSED........IT'S GOING TO THE PRESIDENT!!!!

Please pray the Fed judge doesn't rubberstamp Greer's decision!!!

Posted by: BEB at March 21, 2005 12:49 AM

Breaking news on CNN!

Posted by: Caryn at March 21, 2005 1:00 AM

46 democrats voted for, 53 against, and 102 did not vote.

Posted by: Caryn at March 21, 2005 1:06 AM