Moderators Jeannieb43 Posted March 28, 2005 Moderators Share Posted March 28, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Hearsay and gossip often go hand and hand but not always. Hearsay is something we hear from a second or third party. Normally that doesn't include news networks but usually includes tabloids like The Enquirer or The Star, etc. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Thanks for that pseudolegal definition. Quote Jeannie<br /><br /><br />...Change is inevitable; growth is optional.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Bevin, did you notice this part of the editorial? "Cheshire states that the new diagnosis of 'minimally conscious' was fully defined only after Schiavo was examined by the doctors who convinced a court she was in a permanent vegetative state." Those distinguished neurologists whom you prefer to believe over any other responsible doctors who have examined Terri, were not using the up-to-date official definition of what constitutes a "vegetative state." When Dr. Cheshire says that she responded to her surroundings, and reacted with evident pain when it was inflicted, do you think he could be mistaken about that? Notice that Sung, who had so many opinions, whom you seem to favor, in fact did not examine Terri himself. He is one of the real problems, spectators pontificating from the sidelines, reading into the situation their own preconceived idea that Terri's case fits the definition for "right-to-die." The following is from your quote: "Sung, who has not been involved with the case, said of Cheshire that 'unfortunately his feelings, and possibly his religious beliefs, are affecting his medical decision.'" Where does Sung get off suggesting that Cheshire should not be listened to because he might be a Christian? Are athiests and agnostics now to be regarded as more reputable than Christians? Is this what you are saying, Bevin? Is this what you wish to believe? I would take the testimony of one or two Christian doctors over all the athiest and agnostic doctors in the world, becase by being atheists and agnostics, they qualify as people who are living in denial of the most fundamental truth about life; therefore they it is unwise to believe anything they have to say about anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Remember God started the death penelty. The wages of sin isn't a life sentence in prison. The wages of sin is death. Be careful with your conclusion, Shane. The law was given to open Israel's eyes to the fact that there is none righteous….It was never given as method of salvation or an answer to lawlessness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: The decision to withhold nutrition and water from Terri Schiavo, thus intentially making her die, [is] wrong. Amen! The husband has no "legal" documentation proving that his wife, Terri, wished to die if....To me it is really simple! The judges are worthless and personally I am for 100% civil disobedience. Unlike God, these men do not have Terri's best interest at heart....They call it "the rule of law"! What law? Not God's.... "I desire mercy"... Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted March 29, 2005 Author Share Posted March 29, 2005 Brother Robert, when I quoted "the wages of sin" verse I was trying to apply it to Adam and Eve. That was the origianl death sentance. Adam sinned and Adam died. The wages of sin are death. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: The judges are worthless and personally I am for 100% civil disobedience. What is the New Testament position on our attitudes and behaviour as Christians towards the civil authorities? /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Where does Sung get off suggesting that Cheshire should not be listened to because he might be a Christian? That is NOT what Sung said. Why do you insist on bearing false witnesses? /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Quote: The judges are worthless and personally I am for 100% civil disobedience. What is the New Testament position on our attitudes and behavior as Christians towards the civil authorities? /Bevin Better yet, what was Christ's? Luke 22:24 Also a dispute arose among them [the disciples] as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25 Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles [:"red"]lord it over them[/]; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26 But you are not to be like them. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27 For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves. Do you know what it means [:"red"]to lord it over[/] someone? Well, these judges are doing just that....The family wants to take care of Terri, period! It doesn't matter if she is brain dead or not..., but the judges say "no" we will make the decision - we are the law! You must bow the knee to "the rule of law".... That's lording it over someone!!! Terri's "ex" (and notice I said "ex" because he is with another woman and has two kids by her) has no legal proof that she wanted to die in the situation she is in....Why should he care if her family continues to love and care for her? After all he has moved on.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Quote: The judges are worthless and personally I am for 100% civil disobedience. What is the New Testament position on our attitudes and behaviour as Christians towards the civil authorities? /Bevin Acts 5:28 “We [the authority] gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.” 29 Peter and the other apostles replied: “[:"red"]We must obey God rather than men![/] 30 The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead—whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. 31 God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance and forgiveness of sins to Israel. 32 We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” 33 When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted March 29, 2005 Moderators Share Posted March 29, 2005 Re: " . . . has no legal proof that she wanted to die in the situation she is in . . ." As a matter of fact, a judge has already rulled on this. That judge has based his findings on the testimony of people other than her husband. Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Do you know what it means to lord it over someone? Well, these judges are doing just that....The family wants to take care of Terri, period! It doesn't matter if she is brain dead or not..., but the judges say "no" we will make the decision - we are the law! You must bow the knee to "the rule of law".... That's lording it over someone!!! I have yet to experience a judge or anyperson to be so heartless as to insist that thier sole motive was to "lord it over" someone. In different words, a person who loves total direct 'life/death control' over an individual who they did not know. Especially a person who has been placed in a position of trust. I just don't know anyone like that.... Family members who have to make decisions that are life/death decisions, usually, or at least in my experience, don't really like making those decisions. Sargents in the military don't like that sort of control, because they give the soldiers time away from them and invoke discipline for the purpose of achieving a military goal. Doctors are people who are more interested in making people well, than killing them. So, when it comes to the judges as being protrayed as heartless individuals who love law over people, the court records just dont show that.... If you read the court records, they are aware and have made mention that Micheal is not the best source of information in this case. And they went thru the examining process [which is as rigorous as any in a court room setting[ to be convinced that other people were sincere in thier experiences with Terri that she would not want this.... What bothers me is the abandonment of reason that the judges were heartless men....I don't think so... Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. George Bernard Shaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted March 29, 2005 Moderators Share Posted March 29, 2005 Two quick points: (1) This whole thread just mystifies me. The polls show 60-70% of 'the people' agree with the decision of the judges. So what the premise of the thread *really* means is 'the judges are lording it over the people who think like me'. Or, to use Shane's example, the judges are lording it over the vocal minority who get out the phone calls and letters. But folks, to give in to a vocal minority is not democracy!! Democracy is rule by the majority of the people, like it or not, and the rulings definitely fit with the will of the majority of the people. (2) The Right-wing disdain for the judiciary in general (in the person of 'activist judges') is a scary trend. Why should some young criminal punk respect the system and law and order when the respected leaders of the country, both in politics and the media, disdain the judicial branch of government? Undermining respect for the judiciary is undermining the entire system of government. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Bevin, that most certainly is what Sung implied, when he referred to Cheshire's connection with a Christian biomed ethics group, with the implication that he must be biased and should not be listened to. Atheists and agnostics are the most biased people on earth, and yet you prefer to listen to them over people who believe in God, as if denying God makes you more objective and trustworthy. This is why you are so gullible and mistaken about the whole Evolution-Creation debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Jeannieb43 Posted March 29, 2005 Moderators Share Posted March 29, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> you are so gullible and mistaken about the whole Evolution-Creation debate. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Signal...? or just Noise? Quote Jeannie<br /><br /><br />...Change is inevitable; growth is optional.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 NewsWeek today has a very well researched article on the whole situation. One I think people would do well to read. I will just put a few quotes here Quote: At one Florida nursing home, he (Michael) was so demanding that administrators sought a restraining order against him. But Gloria Centonze, who worked there at the time ... recalls a frequent comment among the nurses: "He may be a bastard, but if I was sick like that, I wish he was my husband" In 1994 Quote: he had simply given up hope according to most medical experts. After so many years in a persistant vegetative state, says James Bernat, a Dartmouth neurologist, the chance of recovery is "so close to zero, you might as well call it zero". Quote: Given polls showing solid majorities supporting the tube's withdrawl, Republicans may have overplayed their hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Quote: Sung said the original diagnosis was based on repeated examinations by “very distinguished neurologists” and he called himself as comfortable with that diagnosis as he can be without examining Schiavo himself. Sung, a man with solid credentials and knowlegeable of both the issues and the main players, gives very solid reasons why he thinks the diagnosis is correct, and Cheshire is wrong. Those reasons have NOTHING to do with Cheshire's beliefs. He then tries to explain possible causes of Cheshire's mistake. In short (a) He is qualified to have an expert opinion. ( He shows why Cheshire is wrong. © He shows why Cheshire is may make a mistake. (d) He is not alone in thinking Cheshire is wrong. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted March 30, 2005 Author Share Posted March 30, 2005 Brother Bravus, The US is not a democracy in the sense that the majority rule. We are a Republic that is ruled by elected leaders. Judges are to interpret the Constitution and protect the rights of minorities which it protects. Polls don't mean much because the 70% that may disagree with saving Terry's life are not passionate about it. You don't see too many protesters with signs saying "Let Her Die". The 30% that wants to save her life care about it a lot. So what we have is a small group that cares a lot and a large group that is indifferent. This is not like the pro-life/pro-choice issue where each side cares a lot and is passionate. A congressman will not lose votes by helping Terry but may lose votes for not helping her. I really don't know enough to have an opinion if Terry should be left to die or not. I have never taken a position on that. My concern is the judicial's lack of concern about the intent of a federal law that was passed due to the will of the people. Do not fool yourself that activist judges pose no threat. We don't know how it will happen, but the easiest way to get a Sunday law is through the judicial system. </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Why should some young criminal punk respect the system and law and order when the respected leaders of the country, both in politics and the media, disdain the judicial branch of government? <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> With this line of thinking you must oppose everything Martin Luther King Jr. accomplished in his life. When something is wrong, responsible people must speak up and object. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Quote: The 30% that wants to save her life care about it a lot Actually, no, they don't. A miniscular percentage - less than 1% of them - do. That is all it takes to make a huge noise. 1% of 100M people is still 1M people. There are only a few dozen fanatics hanging around outside the nursing home. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Quote: the intent of a federal law that was passed due to the will of the people. The intent of the law was to have the federal judges review the case. They did so. The judges did exactly what Congress asked them to do. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Quote: Re: " . . . has no legal proof that she wanted to die in the situation she is in . . ." As a matter of fact, a judge has already rulled on this. That judge has based his findings on the testimony of people other than her husband. So what! My wife and I have talked about what we would want in similar circumstances and I can guarantee we didn't have friends over to listen in....That's a private matter. This is murder....And I stand by my statement, i.e., the judges are "lording it over" Terri's family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Quote: the judges are "lording it over" Terri's family Having publically and vehemently committed himself to an untenable position, Robert inserts second foot into mouth. Genesis 2:24 - Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Her husband IS her family. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_david Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Genesis 2:24 - Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Her husband IS her family. /Bevin <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> im not sure how you can use that text, when we know that he pretty much has left terri as his wife. since he is living with another woman and has children with her. that is a gross misuse of the biblical text Quote //_david Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted March 30, 2005 Author Share Posted March 30, 2005 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> The judges did exactly what Congress asked them to do. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> No they didn't. And today the 11th circuit court said the Congress and the President acted outside the Constitution in passing the law! Give me a break. The law gave Terry the right to a federal review to see if any of her Constitutional rights had been violated. How is protecting her Constitutional rights a violation of the Constitution? And some don't see a problem with activist judges <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Thought ya'll might like to read this: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/mar/05031408.html And Bevin... Quote: "There are only a few dozen fanatics hanging around outside the nursing home. There's a lot more of us "fanatics" praying for her. One would wonder why it is that she still clings to life so hardily when she supposedly wanted to die. You can classify me as a fanatic any day. It's way better than being lukewarm or just downright cold, don't you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Did you ever think we would see the day in America where there would be armed guards in and outside a hospice room for the sole purpose of preventing a mother and father from giving a drop of water to their innocent, disabled daughter who some judicial panel ordered to be killed by starvation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.