Terry Schiavo
I don't know how a subpoenae from Congress does any good to a breathing meat sack, formerly occupied by Terry Schiavo. Where's Dr. Kevorkian when you need him? Oh that's right... prison.
Christian radio stations have become as emotionally hysterical and mindlessly foaming at the mouth as the anti-Castro Catholics got with Elian Gonzalez, when they were spreading stories about the Virgin Mary sending dolphins to guide Elian to shore. Now a Christian lady I'm talking to about this would have us believe that the body of Terry Schiavo is responding to her family, when (as the report says) the cerebral cortex is liquid? This is the same lady who thinks a single-cell human embryo might be conscious and capable of suffering if you abort the pregnancy. The fact that it possesses no brain cells does not seem to give her pause. "You believe Terry Schiavo can feel pain? With a nonexistent cerebral cortex?" I asked her. "Let me guess, her immortal soul is animating her body. What's next? The Virgin Mary showed the pattern of her face in your pancakes this morning and told you she did it?" The only way this could be more of a farce would be if Congress subpoenaed Bernie from Weekend At Bernie's.
Comments
raendrop on Mar. 21, 2005 5:53 AM
They really should make up their minds. If they decide to let her live, then that should be the plan of action. If they decide to let her die, they should do it quickly and mercifully. Letting her starve to death is abominable. We call ourselves civilized? We think euthanasia is a bad, bad thing, but letting someone starve is fine and proper? What kind of a fucktard society is this?
chrispullen on Mar. 21, 2005 5:25 PM
I agree. As long as a desicion is made and stuck to I do not care which choice is made. Personally I dont think there is a point to keeping her alive with no brain function, but that is not not for me to decide. Slowly killing her and then bringing her back muiltiple times just seems cruel. This indeed seems to be a job for Dr. Kevorkian...oh well politics suck.
brendand on Mar. 23, 2005 7:17 PM
While she clearly isn't a functional member of society, it does seem a *bit* disrespectful to call her a "meat sack." At least in my book. :)
matt-arnold on Mar. 23, 2005 7:47 PM
The real Terry Schiavo never was merely a "breathing meat sack." Like all of us, she exists during the time between the beginning and end of her experiences and then ceases to exist. But as her husband says, she died fifteen years ago. My description is accurate for all that's left. Unless we have been greatly misled by the medical profession for reasons unknown to me, what we have here is not (as you describe it) a "member of society" that is merely not functioning in that role. It is less than that. The citizen with human rights is not there; it's her Frankenstein-like corpse, with a metabolism artificially propped up as if on puppet stilts. Tissue experiences no awareness, no desire-- only the grey matter experiences that, and it's ruined. So what use does the tissue need with continuing its metabolic process?
brendand on Mar. 23, 2005 7:54 PM
I agree with you. And I think her death should be hastened, not "allowing her to starve to death" which is what will likely happen. I'm merely pointing out that I think it's disrespectful to be QUITE so cold in referring to her body as a "meat sack."
Wouldn't you be offended if anything horrible like this ever happened to someone you cared about, and someone called their body a "meat sack?"
There are times when I wonder if you aren't completely devoid of emotion.
matt-arnold on Mar. 23, 2005 8:35 PM
I'm working on it.
I see your point. I certainly would be offended. But then again, I would not have created this hoopla and gotten a $3.5 million book deal As Terry Schiavo's parents have done. Were it not for them expressing such a fit of journalistic, congressional, presidential, and judicial denial, and exploitation of the gullible, it would not be necessary to shout the ugly truth about their daughter's fate to the nation through a bullhorn. I would not say such things to those who accept the obvious, let go and move on, which is probably everybody except theocratic pro-lifers. Decorum would have been vastly preferable, and I would use it in all cases where I could do so. But it has become regrettably necessary to abandon decorum where the fundamentalist agenda is concerned.
syrennikki on Mar. 29, 2005 1:29 AM
I figured that since you decided to comment on my lj, I'd comment on yours. :)
I actually agree with you. She's not living anymore, in any sense of the word. She's not feeling anything, not experiencing anything, not responding to anything. And if her husband's right, than it was her will not to live any longer. I'm not so sure starvation is the right way to go about things, but I'm not the person making the decisions.
The one thing I really hate about all this is the exploitation. People will question her husband's motives until they're blue in the face, but they won't question the parents, who are talking to the media, creating the hype, making (if not making, condoning) "Save Terry Schiavo" t-shirts, and other such things that help to distort the facts? They aren't in it for the money? Yeah, right.
All in all, I agree with you on pretty much all of what you said. Stupid media.
dj-brick on Mar. 31, 2005 1:08 PM — re; Terry Schiavo
Now how did you know what I saw in my pancakes this morning? ;-)
Brick
Leave a Comment