Terri Schiavo?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,022
Likes: 0
From: Lafayette, LA
Originally Posted by s2000qtee,Mar 23 2005, 08:45 AM
no....today doesnt look good either 
Same here... gotta wait till Sunday. I'll be in Panama City Beach, FL from Friday-Sunday for spring break
... but have a girlfriend who isn't coming with us so I won't be getting any until I get back. This gonna be tough. 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 88,444
Likes: 21
From: Pt. A to Pt. B via VTEC!!
Originally Posted by KenS2K,Mar 23 2005, 01:53 AM
Of the people = Her parents want action.
By the people = Elected officials act to allow action.
For the people = Terry gets her day in court.
... no meddling.
... no mandates.
... no problem.
By the people = Elected officials act to allow action.
For the people = Terry gets her day in court.
... no meddling.
... no mandates.
... no problem.
Her parents own her rights?, not her actual "I dont want to live like" statements she made when she was coherent (or her life long mates)?
Elected Republican officials with the Religious right in their back pockets....How many judges have to vote this down before the Republicans give up?
Hasn't she been in court enough?
You honestly feel an emergency joint session of Congress, and our president flying from Texas to Washington cutting vacation time short for ONE person is NOT Meddling and not setting a mandate?
Why doesn't the religious right consider the fact that if there was no science, technology and medicine involved this poor women would have been dead a very long time ago?!! We can use science and technology when it is convenient for their set of morals and values ...but can not when it does not match their beliefs?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by KenS2K,Mar 22 2005, 09:43 PM
Actually, this "IS" a Federal issue. US Constitutional protections are a Federal issue.
Right to life, liberty ... bla bla bla.
Right to life, liberty ... bla bla bla.
If you want to see what the constitution has to say about what is and what is not a federal issue read Article 1 section 8 of the constitution. You agree that this is not about borrowing or minting money, nor is it declaring war or about piracy on the high seas. You won't find anything about a case like this.
This is a state issue or a personal issue because the Tenth ammendment says it is (see the Bill of Rights).
I don't know how you couldn't know this... every Canadian kid learns this stuff in 4th grade.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,318
Likes: 9
From: This is not my house!
Originally Posted by KenS2K,Mar 22 2005, 11:04 PM
Actually they do.
Are you aware that the federal government poured more than $200 million into adult-stem-cell research and about $25 million into embryonic-stem-cell research in 2003. In addition, private investors have abundantly invested in adult-stem-cell research, while generally shunning embryonic and human cloning research, largely because adult therapies are so much closer to fruition than embryonic approaches.
The "big debate" over stem cells is the "government funding" of embryo cell use. The previous administration under Clinton refused to provide any federal funding for eight years. Contrast that to the Bush administration, which agreed to provide seed funding, but said "show me results" before they could consider additional funding. Smart business. So far their are zero positive results from the use of embryo cells. The embryo cell either gets rejected or turn into a cancer. They still have unused funds and cells for testing. Throwing more money at it currently is a waste. Non-issue.
Adult stem cells is where the results are promising. Using a persons own cells eliminates the major problem of rejection. Same problem transplant patients have. Do you realize the amount of anti-rejection drugs my father has to take? His new modern miracle of a heart happens to be a best case scenario, but he still has to kill his immune system several times a day to keep it. Now his own body can't properly fight a common cold. The "we have a cure but need embryo cells to produce it" holy grail is a lie. The public sector can invest their funding anywhere they choose. Naturally they are sending their funds to where the positive results are happening; adult stem cell research.
Are you aware that the federal government poured more than $200 million into adult-stem-cell research and about $25 million into embryonic-stem-cell research in 2003. In addition, private investors have abundantly invested in adult-stem-cell research, while generally shunning embryonic and human cloning research, largely because adult therapies are so much closer to fruition than embryonic approaches.
The "big debate" over stem cells is the "government funding" of embryo cell use. The previous administration under Clinton refused to provide any federal funding for eight years. Contrast that to the Bush administration, which agreed to provide seed funding, but said "show me results" before they could consider additional funding. Smart business. So far their are zero positive results from the use of embryo cells. The embryo cell either gets rejected or turn into a cancer. They still have unused funds and cells for testing. Throwing more money at it currently is a waste. Non-issue.
Adult stem cells is where the results are promising. Using a persons own cells eliminates the major problem of rejection. Same problem transplant patients have. Do you realize the amount of anti-rejection drugs my father has to take? His new modern miracle of a heart happens to be a best case scenario, but he still has to kill his immune system several times a day to keep it. Now his own body can't properly fight a common cold. The "we have a cure but need embryo cells to produce it" holy grail is a lie. The public sector can invest their funding anywhere they choose. Naturally they are sending their funds to where the positive results are happening; adult stem cell research.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,760
Likes: 0
From: ghettoville, abq, nm
I'm not going to read back, so if I cover something that's been said, :TFB:
A couple of things I found interesting - her parents' lawyer is now arguing that it is a matter of religion - taking the feeding tube away from her is tantamount to suicide, thus she'll go to hell (Terri's Catholic).
Secondly, one of the protesters tried to take a bottle of water into her. Ok, so what are you going to do with that water? Sprinkle it on her face? Pour it in her mouth, thus drowning her? WTF, how moronic are these people?
Bage, I'd be proud to know it was you (or any of our esteemed 
s) that sent me on my way should I ever end up like Terri.
Dave Ross (CBS News) pointed out that if this legislation to keep her alive is passed, and NOT found unconstitutional, then it opens the door for government healthcare. Any time a claim or procedure is denied by the insurance companies, we just sue them, using this law as precedent, to show they are denying us our quality of life
:suethebastardsanyway:
A couple of things I found interesting - her parents' lawyer is now arguing that it is a matter of religion - taking the feeding tube away from her is tantamount to suicide, thus she'll go to hell (Terri's Catholic).
Secondly, one of the protesters tried to take a bottle of water into her. Ok, so what are you going to do with that water? Sprinkle it on her face? Pour it in her mouth, thus drowning her? WTF, how moronic are these people?
Bage, I'd be proud to know it was you (or any of our esteemed s) that sent me on my way should I ever end up like Terri.Dave Ross (CBS News) pointed out that if this legislation to keep her alive is passed, and NOT found unconstitutional, then it opens the door for government healthcare. Any time a claim or procedure is denied by the insurance companies, we just sue them, using this law as precedent, to show they are denying us our quality of life
:suethebastardsanyway:
