Quote
averagefellar said:
Are you trying to tell me that this person lives anything close to a normal life?

No, I am not. But her ability to lead a "normal life" should not be the standard in determining whether she ought to be starved to death. The fact is that as long as she gets food and water, she'll be alive. That's the same for all of us. I would not deny you food and water simply because you aren't capable of leading a "normal life."

Quote
How far do we go in letting Big Brother order our lives around in the name of some outside chance of survival? Technology could keep many of us alive for incredibly long periods of time, are we willing to have "life extension" become our guide for legal decisions?

William, don't you think it's a FAR WORSE precedent to set that the courts can order that you be starved to death because you are not able to defend yourself against an unfaithful spouse who no longer cares to be burdened with your existence? These aren't "extraordinary means" being employed, here. All Terri absolutely requires is food and water, and we're not even certain that she must receive that sustenance through a tube. Also, there's really not a lot of technology involved, here. No machine is required. As I said before, she breathes on her own, and is able to digest food.

Quote
Oh, the interpretation of exactly what and how she feels isn't unanymous.

All the more reason not to starve her to death, don't you think?

Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.