Terry Shiavo has finally died.

Thank God. Now maybe we can hear less about it on the news.
It's clear where CNN come down on this debate. They spent 5 minutes demonising Michael Shiavo this morning, and allowed some priest to speak on TV calling him a cold-hearted killer.
What do these people not understand? That facts are simple : she's been brain-dead for 15 years. If she didn't show improvement after 1 year, 15 years is going to make no difference. Her husband has had her best interests at heart since the beginning yet her parents have insisted that she be kept alive with zero quality of life. Michael Shiavo has started pushing for an autopsy now to try to prove to everyone that he was right all along and guess what? Surprise surprise - the parents aren't so hot on the idea now. Because they now realise that when the truth comes out, they will be the ones who will be demonised. They'd rather keep her husband as the villain and the only way to do that is to get in the way of an autopsy now.
I think we've got another Ed Smart on our hands here - I think her parents are in it for the money and have very little regard for their daughter. I think they're milking it for all its worth to reap financial gain from it. I'm positive that if Michael Shiavo had turned over custody to them along with the medical malpractice money he'd been using to fund her treatment, they'd have let her die a long time ago and taken off with the cash.
Time will tell if I'm right on this one or not. That's just how I see it. Hopefully the poor woman can rest in peace now.

Comments

Anonymous said…
You're an idiot...what is your definition of quality of life? How about babies that cannot feed themselves or the disabled, should they be murdered as well? If your defniition of quality of life is what you can produce or communicate to others, guess what, you are a product of western thought and can't make your own opinions, you just go with the flow. Telling it like it is from an idiot, thanks.
Anonymous said…
In reply to anonymous.....

Riiiight.

Because babies often are unable to feed themselves through being catatonic for years?

And what about the disabled? What does being disabled have to do with this tragic case?

Don't use moronic, random comparisons to try and back up your point, if you have an opinion about a specific case try expressing it clearly.

Using such blatantly emotive yet unrelated comparisons only undermines your own position, if you feel as strongly about this as you seem to at least try to construct a coherent argument.

Popular posts from this blog

The non-separation of the LDS church and Utah state.

Employees don't want much