Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes

You are completely distorting my position.

I am not in anyway claiming that her rights should be denied because she is
in a PVS. I am saying, in fact, just the opposite. The best evidence that
we have is that she would refuse a feeding tube in the condition that she is
in. My position is that we should be maintaining her right to self
determination, her autonomy, even after she is not able to make her wishes
known.

I have made no comments or insinuations about PVS and whatever that means as
far as whether or not she is a human, a person, a non spiritual being or
whatever. I have not broached those topics, but they are probably worth
discussing, so dont say that I have made those statements when I havent
addressed it.

Why are you ignoring the testimony of other people other than the husband
that corroborated his position that she would not want to continue treatment
in this condition? Why are you convinced that she is not in a PVS when 3
out of 5 expert witnesses agreed that she was, do you claim to know more
about PVS than they do? Testing is not necessary to make a diagnosis of
PVS.

She will be treated and made comfortable. She is not being offered less
protection than animals. How many animals have years of court cases, state
and federal supreme court decisions, and gubernatorial stays before they
die? Your comments dont fit with the facts.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
To: "'jack syme'" <drsyme@cablespeed.com>; "'Bill Dozier'"
<wddozier@mac.com>
Cc: "'ASA'" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 9:15 AM
Subject: RE: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of jack syme
>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:48 PM
>> To: Glenn Morton; 'Bill Dozier'
>> Cc: 'ASA'
>> Subject: Re: cruzan v schiavo what a difference a decade makes
>>
>>
>> Ok let me try to spell it out again.
>>
>> If Mr Schiavo had taken his wife and tied her up in a room
>> and didnt feed
>> her or give her water. He would be arrested.
>>
>> That is not the same as her being in a PVS and him claiming
>> that she would
>> not want to continue to get feeding via artificial means in
>> that condition.
>>
>> So, if I denied my dog food and water would I be in trouble?
>> Yes. If my
>> dog was in a PVS and I denied him feeding via an artificial
>> tube, would
>> anyone complain about that, even PETA? I dont think so.
>>
>> Why do you think a person in a PVS that is being fed
>> artificiallly, is the
>> same as a pet that is otherwise normal, that is being
>> deprived of food for
>> no good reason?
>>
>> That is why it is not a valid comparison. You are comparing
>> completely
>> different things. I didnt want to address it, because I dont
>> want to derail
>> the topic into a disussion of the worth of animals vs humans.
>> I dont want
>> to go there. Your point is not a valid comparison, lets just
>> leave it at
>> that.
>
> Given that my point is EXACTLY that animals and mass murderers get
> treated better when put to death than this poor woman, you would NOT be
> derailing the conversation. You would be AVOIDING the point. That is why
> you state that you don't want to go there. Of course you don't because
> it exposes the utter moral weakness of your position. You would treat a
> dog better than a human.
>
> As to the issues being two separate things, they aren't. You want them
> to be, but for many of us, they aren't. You can't simply argue that
> because YOU think they are two separate things therefore you don't have
> to present a cogent and well thought out position on why. The above
> doesn't do that. It states your believe, but lays no philosohical basis.
>
>
> Are you arguing that because she is supposedly PVS (but as Bill Dozier
> points out the tests have not been run), that therefore she has no inner
> mental life? If you say that would make a difference between the dog
> and her--that PVS makes a human an non-spiritual being, makes them a
> thing, like a rock--- then you have to present evidence of why you think
> that. What evidence do you have, does anyone have of her subjective
> inner mental state?
>
> You need to state clearly why PVS denies her as a US citizen the basic
> rights given her in the Constitution (or rather by her God). The right
> of life is the first mentioned, yet you think she is not deserving of it
> or that someone has a right to deny her this right. On what basis? The
> testimony of a man of whom the court it self noted that he could not be
> considered impartial because he stands to get a lot of money????
>
> Tell me what crime this person did to deserve such a horrid death? Tell
> me why she is no longer at the level of protection offered animals. I
> would say that even if your dog was the most PVS dog in the world, you
> wouldn't be allowed to starve him. You could give him a shot to put him
> to sleep, but you couldn't starve him. PETA would not allow that. They
> complain at the quick deaths given cattle when slaughtered for human
> food so I can't see them going silent if you torture a dog, even a PVS
> dog. IT would be illegal, inhumane and evil to starve a PVS dog.. Give
> him a shot!
>
> As to PETA, you may not have seen their tactics in the UK or you might
> not say what they wouldn't do.
>
Received on Sat Mar 19 10:33:09 2005