Thursday, March 31, 2005
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Friday, March 18, 2005
A lack of justice is nothing new - say no to the culture of death
Is it by accident that Judge George Greer of Pinellas county chose March 18 as the day on which Michael Schiavo is allowed to begin the slow tortured death of his wife? That day is exactly one week prior to Good Friday 2005, the day on which we remember the Passion of Christ, especially the torture that He accepted for our sake. If ever there was an attempt to thumb the nose at Christian values, the choice of date by George Greer tells us exactly what he thinks of an innocent Catholic woman who is fighting to stay alive through the efforts of her family, whilst her husband wills her to die.
There are parallels between the lack of justice in the trial of Jesus, and the lack of justice in the Schindler vs. Schiavo case. I see parallels such as the false witnesses who have testified to something that is not true, because the Sanhedrin found men who were willing to come forward and give false testimony against Jesus. Michael Schiavo has used his own brother and sister-in-law to give what can only be considered as false testimony that has had the effect of condemning a severely disabled woman to death.
To give an idea of the kind of inconsistent evidence that Michael Schiavo has given, here is a portion from the transcript of his latest interview:
BURY: Michael, did Terri, your wife, leave any kind of written instructions about her wishes?
SCHIAVO: She didn't leave any written instructions. She has verbally expressed her wishes to me and other people.
BURY: She had verbally expressed them in what context exactly?
SCHIAVO: Through watching some TV program, a conversation that happened regarding her uncle that was very ill.
BURY: And how long ago was that?
SCHIAVO: Oh, we're talking — it's now been 15 years. We're talking a couple of year, three years before this happened to Terri.
BURY: So there's no kind of written record at all. It's basically your recollection and those of other family members.
SCHIAVO: Yes, it is.
How interesting!! Here is a prime example of the inconsistencies of Michael Schiavo. He has been giving this same piece of evidence, not only in a court of law, but in public interview, and he has changed the context in which the statement was made. If the judge in this case had been a truly just judge, when would he allow this hearsay oral evidence? The length of time between when the accident happened, when Michael first applied to end her life in this way, and the alleged statement is a huge gap. The alleged conversation was supposed to have happened when Terri was just 22 years of age. The evidence from Schiavo's brother and sister in law is equally suspicious, since they cannot be accepted as a disinterested party to the proceedings.
This is why the evidence given in this case is on a par with the evidence given by the false witnesses when Jesus was placed on trial. The false witnesses who came before the Sanhedrin and spoke against Jesus gave hearsay evidence. Their charges were groundless and if it was not for the fact that the real plotters were those who judged Jesus then it should have been obvious that the witnesses were unreliable. Yet, what was ordained by God had to come about as it was written. The false witnesses had their place in God's plan of salvation.
When the Israelites turned against the Lord and followed false gods, they were warned and then they were punished by God allowing Israel, and then Judea being invaded by their enemy, and the people dispersed and taken into exile. In the area that was known as Samaria, the people turned to Baal as their god, and they offered up their children as a sacrifice to Astarte. Despite our Christian upbringing our world has a tendency to forget everything that has happened in past centuries, and turns again to embrace the evil powers of Satan. How quickly have we forgotten the horrors of Nazi Germany. It is an amnesia that is encouraged by those who want to rewrite that history and pretend that the Holocaust did not happen. Yet the truth is, that in Nazi Germany, the elderly and disabled were put to death in gas ovens in hospitals ahead of the Final Solution.
George Felos, George Greer, Michael Schiavo and their cronies have been using Terri as a test case that will bring about state approved euthanasia of someone who is not near death. Michael Schiavo wants his wife dead and this is obvious when we realise that he has been too keen to remove the artificial means of hydration and feeding. George Felos is working with Schiavo because he sees himself as some kind of saviour for those who want to embrace death through euthanasia. He wants to open the way to allowing decisions to be made to end the lives of those who are considered to be useless. In this case he sees this disabled woman as being a useless being who has "already departed this world". George Greer seems to want to be the judge who brings about yet another court sponsored change in the law. Greer's application and knowledge of the laws of Florida seems to be very scant, and his application of the Divine Law is non-existent. Terri is not the first woman to be endangered by the rulings of George Greer.
Jesus, an innocent man was condemned to death, and Terri Schindler Schiavo, an innocent woman has also been condemned to death. Jesus is our Messiah. Terri is an ordinary severely disabled woman, who ended up that way in suspicious circumstances.
JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL
There are parallels between the lack of justice in the trial of Jesus, and the lack of justice in the Schindler vs. Schiavo case. I see parallels such as the false witnesses who have testified to something that is not true, because the Sanhedrin found men who were willing to come forward and give false testimony against Jesus. Michael Schiavo has used his own brother and sister-in-law to give what can only be considered as false testimony that has had the effect of condemning a severely disabled woman to death.
To give an idea of the kind of inconsistent evidence that Michael Schiavo has given, here is a portion from the transcript of his latest interview:
BURY: Michael, did Terri, your wife, leave any kind of written instructions about her wishes?
SCHIAVO: She didn't leave any written instructions. She has verbally expressed her wishes to me and other people.
BURY: She had verbally expressed them in what context exactly?
SCHIAVO: Through watching some TV program, a conversation that happened regarding her uncle that was very ill.
BURY: And how long ago was that?
SCHIAVO: Oh, we're talking — it's now been 15 years. We're talking a couple of year, three years before this happened to Terri.
BURY: So there's no kind of written record at all. It's basically your recollection and those of other family members.
SCHIAVO: Yes, it is.
How interesting!! Here is a prime example of the inconsistencies of Michael Schiavo. He has been giving this same piece of evidence, not only in a court of law, but in public interview, and he has changed the context in which the statement was made. If the judge in this case had been a truly just judge, when would he allow this hearsay oral evidence? The length of time between when the accident happened, when Michael first applied to end her life in this way, and the alleged statement is a huge gap. The alleged conversation was supposed to have happened when Terri was just 22 years of age. The evidence from Schiavo's brother and sister in law is equally suspicious, since they cannot be accepted as a disinterested party to the proceedings.
This is why the evidence given in this case is on a par with the evidence given by the false witnesses when Jesus was placed on trial. The false witnesses who came before the Sanhedrin and spoke against Jesus gave hearsay evidence. Their charges were groundless and if it was not for the fact that the real plotters were those who judged Jesus then it should have been obvious that the witnesses were unreliable. Yet, what was ordained by God had to come about as it was written. The false witnesses had their place in God's plan of salvation.
When the Israelites turned against the Lord and followed false gods, they were warned and then they were punished by God allowing Israel, and then Judea being invaded by their enemy, and the people dispersed and taken into exile. In the area that was known as Samaria, the people turned to Baal as their god, and they offered up their children as a sacrifice to Astarte. Despite our Christian upbringing our world has a tendency to forget everything that has happened in past centuries, and turns again to embrace the evil powers of Satan. How quickly have we forgotten the horrors of Nazi Germany. It is an amnesia that is encouraged by those who want to rewrite that history and pretend that the Holocaust did not happen. Yet the truth is, that in Nazi Germany, the elderly and disabled were put to death in gas ovens in hospitals ahead of the Final Solution.
George Felos, George Greer, Michael Schiavo and their cronies have been using Terri as a test case that will bring about state approved euthanasia of someone who is not near death. Michael Schiavo wants his wife dead and this is obvious when we realise that he has been too keen to remove the artificial means of hydration and feeding. George Felos is working with Schiavo because he sees himself as some kind of saviour for those who want to embrace death through euthanasia. He wants to open the way to allowing decisions to be made to end the lives of those who are considered to be useless. In this case he sees this disabled woman as being a useless being who has "already departed this world". George Greer seems to want to be the judge who brings about yet another court sponsored change in the law. Greer's application and knowledge of the laws of Florida seems to be very scant, and his application of the Divine Law is non-existent. Terri is not the first woman to be endangered by the rulings of George Greer.
Jesus, an innocent man was condemned to death, and Terri Schindler Schiavo, an innocent woman has also been condemned to death. Jesus is our Messiah. Terri is an ordinary severely disabled woman, who ended up that way in suspicious circumstances.
JUSTICE MUST PREVAIL
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
The modern T4 program - following the example of the Nazi Party
Have you ever wondered where the term euthanasia came from? The term euthanasia was used as an euphamism for "mercy killing" in Nazi Germany. However, the concept dates back to the philosophy of Jermemy Bentham
You can find futher information here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/t4.html
In Hitler's Germany, the Nazi Party was preoccupied with ensuring racial purity, racial hygiene and national health and they were fairly consistent in their attempts to remove the people that they thought were unfit to remain and produce inferior offspring. In 1935 the Nuremburg Laws provided for enforced sterilization of those who were considered to be unfit to produce offspring, including the forced sterilization of the physically disabled, the mentally handicapped, as well as children who were half-breeds.
If one were to examine the demand for euthanasia in our society today, one can see the obvious parallels in thinking between that of the Nazi Party and the proponents of the involuntary death of the mentally and physically disabled. It is probable that the number of physically and mentally disabled patients who perished at the hands of the Nazis could be as high as 300, 000. It is not possible to estimate the exact number who were exterminated prior to the Final Solution.
The first parallel between euthanasia in Nazi Germany and euthanasia today is the targetting of the sick, mentally and physically disabled and the elderly. This becomes obvious when one begins to compare and contrast the language that was used then, and the language that is used in the 21st Century when discussing what is becoming the world's Final Solution against those who are considered to be inferior in some way. There is a bridge that crosses between the two eras, and that bridge is the language and terminology employed by the followers of L. Ron Hubbard. Bioethecists such as Peter Singer have been using terminology that strips away the meaning of human, such that being alive or human does not apply to the unborn, the mentally and physically handicapped, as well as anyone who is incapacitated as a result of an accident involving brain injury. There is an universal trend towards the notion that if one is not able to reason then that person is not alive. This kind of thinking is also at the heart of L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology movement.
The second parallel is that of the language that is employed to describe the people who are considered by the Nazi Party, as well as by Scientologists to be non people who should be eliminated from society. It was Hitler who had introduced the notion of the alleged superiority of the Aryan race, and anyone who did not measure up was considered as "trash" . This has been perfected in Florida where a disabled woman is being put on death row because of a court order for her execution. Her crime? There is no crime because it is her husband who wants her dead. The difficulty in the Schindler vs Schiavo case is that Michael Schiavo and his lawyers are claiming that Terri is "dead", yet how they define "death" is not the usage of the ordinary man. The culture of death people who are behind this action are attempting to change the meaning of "death" in the English language. The methodology being applied is that of a media campaign that is designed to confuse the ordinary person about what is meant by death. The campaign that is being pursued is one that encourages what they term "mercy killing" for all citizens, not just in the USA but throughout the world who are considered to be useless. The list of those who are affected by this deceitful campaign includes: children with spina bifida, cerebal palsy, blind, deaf, Downs Syndrome, any rare disease that affects the quality of life. plus children and adults who are suffering from cancer, crippling forms of arthritis, as well as those who are suffering from Alzheimer's disease, dementia due to old age, brain damage as a result of a stroke or injury, as well as those who are paraplegic and quadraplegic.
The third parallel between then and now is the contempt towards the physically and mentally disabled, as well as the elderly and those who are terminally ill. The term that is used is "euthanasia". It is meant to be "doctor assisted suicide" but it is a lot more than that today. There is also a parallel between the desire of the Nazis to rid the population of the people that are referred to as trash by Hitler, and the desire of the Scientologists to ensure the death of people that they consider to not have the right to continue to live. Anyone who requires life support is at risk of being classified as not being worth the effort to revive them. In fact there is a trend for doctors in the major hospitals to pressure relatives of the grave ill, especially those brain damaged as a result of a stroke, to accept the idea of posting a "do not resucitate" order. In such circumstances it requires a lot of strength to fight on with the loved one such that he or she dies peacefully but not as the result of neglect, or even passive euthanasia.
When one begins to contrast the kind of language employed within Scientology, there is an overwhelming revulsion towards the policies that have been implemented in the name of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. In fact there are some rather chilling parallels between L. Ron Hubbard and Adolf Hitler. Yet it is not just the adherents of Scientology that are using this language. It is very widespread within the medical community, and it is being taught within courses on bioethics by Peter Singer and his cohorts. There is a very dangerous trend towards the idea that one must save animals but any vulnerable human is not worth the effort because they are non-persons, and they no longer exist or function as humans, thus making them the target of the merchants of death.
You can find futher information here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/t4.html
In Hitler's Germany, the Nazi Party was preoccupied with ensuring racial purity, racial hygiene and national health and they were fairly consistent in their attempts to remove the people that they thought were unfit to remain and produce inferior offspring. In 1935 the Nuremburg Laws provided for enforced sterilization of those who were considered to be unfit to produce offspring, including the forced sterilization of the physically disabled, the mentally handicapped, as well as children who were half-breeds.
If one were to examine the demand for euthanasia in our society today, one can see the obvious parallels in thinking between that of the Nazi Party and the proponents of the involuntary death of the mentally and physically disabled. It is probable that the number of physically and mentally disabled patients who perished at the hands of the Nazis could be as high as 300, 000. It is not possible to estimate the exact number who were exterminated prior to the Final Solution.
The first parallel between euthanasia in Nazi Germany and euthanasia today is the targetting of the sick, mentally and physically disabled and the elderly. This becomes obvious when one begins to compare and contrast the language that was used then, and the language that is used in the 21st Century when discussing what is becoming the world's Final Solution against those who are considered to be inferior in some way. There is a bridge that crosses between the two eras, and that bridge is the language and terminology employed by the followers of L. Ron Hubbard. Bioethecists such as Peter Singer have been using terminology that strips away the meaning of human, such that being alive or human does not apply to the unborn, the mentally and physically handicapped, as well as anyone who is incapacitated as a result of an accident involving brain injury. There is an universal trend towards the notion that if one is not able to reason then that person is not alive. This kind of thinking is also at the heart of L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology movement.
The second parallel is that of the language that is employed to describe the people who are considered by the Nazi Party, as well as by Scientologists to be non people who should be eliminated from society. It was Hitler who had introduced the notion of the alleged superiority of the Aryan race, and anyone who did not measure up was considered as "trash" . This has been perfected in Florida where a disabled woman is being put on death row because of a court order for her execution. Her crime? There is no crime because it is her husband who wants her dead. The difficulty in the Schindler vs Schiavo case is that Michael Schiavo and his lawyers are claiming that Terri is "dead", yet how they define "death" is not the usage of the ordinary man. The culture of death people who are behind this action are attempting to change the meaning of "death" in the English language. The methodology being applied is that of a media campaign that is designed to confuse the ordinary person about what is meant by death. The campaign that is being pursued is one that encourages what they term "mercy killing" for all citizens, not just in the USA but throughout the world who are considered to be useless. The list of those who are affected by this deceitful campaign includes: children with spina bifida, cerebal palsy, blind, deaf, Downs Syndrome, any rare disease that affects the quality of life. plus children and adults who are suffering from cancer, crippling forms of arthritis, as well as those who are suffering from Alzheimer's disease, dementia due to old age, brain damage as a result of a stroke or injury, as well as those who are paraplegic and quadraplegic.
The third parallel between then and now is the contempt towards the physically and mentally disabled, as well as the elderly and those who are terminally ill. The term that is used is "euthanasia". It is meant to be "doctor assisted suicide" but it is a lot more than that today. There is also a parallel between the desire of the Nazis to rid the population of the people that are referred to as trash by Hitler, and the desire of the Scientologists to ensure the death of people that they consider to not have the right to continue to live. Anyone who requires life support is at risk of being classified as not being worth the effort to revive them. In fact there is a trend for doctors in the major hospitals to pressure relatives of the grave ill, especially those brain damaged as a result of a stroke, to accept the idea of posting a "do not resucitate" order. In such circumstances it requires a lot of strength to fight on with the loved one such that he or she dies peacefully but not as the result of neglect, or even passive euthanasia.
When one begins to contrast the kind of language employed within Scientology, there is an overwhelming revulsion towards the policies that have been implemented in the name of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. In fact there are some rather chilling parallels between L. Ron Hubbard and Adolf Hitler. Yet it is not just the adherents of Scientology that are using this language. It is very widespread within the medical community, and it is being taught within courses on bioethics by Peter Singer and his cohorts. There is a very dangerous trend towards the idea that one must save animals but any vulnerable human is not worth the effort because they are non-persons, and they no longer exist or function as humans, thus making them the target of the merchants of death.
Friday, March 04, 2005
Living Will vs. Hearsay Evidence
One of the many contradictory aspects of the Terri Schiavo case is that of Judge Greer accepting hearsay evidence from Michael Schiavo, his brother and sister-in-law that Terri was supposed to have said that she did not want to be left alive through the use of artificial support, whilst rejecting evidence from Terri's family and friends that she never expressed such thoughts.
It has always been accepted that hearsay evidence is not acceptable in a court of law, yet in the courtroom of Judge George Greer, this hearsay evidence, that did not emerge until at least 5 years after Terri was left brain damaged that Michael Schiavo suddenly remembers that Terri did not want to remain alive in that state. On the other hand, Michael Schiavo's girlfriend at the time stated that Michael had stated to her that Terri had not made such a request. This evidence was also ignored by Judge George Greer.
If Terri Schiavo had made a Living Will, in which she had set out her wishes in the event of being incapacitated, then the court would have been able to make a determination based upon the contents of such a will. The Catholic Church has guidelines about what is acceptable for a Living Will format, and if Terri had thought that such a will was necessary then no doubt she would have followed the accepted format. However, this is not the case. Terri did not leave explicit instructions for her well-being in the event of being incapacitated.
What is the implications of the lack of a Living Will in this case? First of all it has left a severely brain damaged woman open to physical and psychological abuse by her husband as he continues to try and have her killed by the state. The attempt to have Terri starved and dehydrated to death is an abuse of the due process of the law.
Second, it has left the way open for Terri to be abused by people who are unknown to her, to use her as a pawn in their attempt to impose state approved general euthanasia as a result of any court decision to pull out the feeding tube from Terri. Yes, Terri is being used by the pro-euthanasia lobby in Florida that includes the lawyers for Michael Schiavo, George Felos and Deborah Bushnell. This lobby has one goal in mind where this case is concerned and that is to oversee the death of Terri Schindler-Schiavo so that they can claim a victory for their "right to die" agenda, that is the culture of death.
Third, there is a more general implication for severely disabled people who do not have the capacity to make an informed decision to have a Living Will. If Terri Schiavo loses her life as a result of a decision in a court of law, then all those who have a physical or mental disability are at risk of someone applying to the courts to have them killed too. The way is also open for situations where people who have been in a long term coma are considered to be a drain upon society and their lives could be terminated.
The lack of a Living Will means that Terri should be protected by the courts so that her husband cannot do what he has proposed doing to her. Since she is not on life support equipment, and she is not comatose in her bed, then Justice Greer had no right to accept the hearsay evidence of Michael Schiavo and grant the request to put this young woman to death by a slow and painful process. It is a slap in the face to all who have some form of incapacity and disability that their rights can be overridden in this manner.
Who is the beneficiary of pushing for the acceptance of hearsay evidence? The true beneficiary is the pro-euthanasia lobby. It is not Terri Schiavo because she has been sentenced to die slowly and painfully. It is not those who have incapacitating disability, especially the vulnerable babies that are born with defects, including an incapacity such as cystic fibrosis, spina bifida, heart defects and Downs Syndrome. It is a decision that threatens the life of the elderly and especially those who suffer from Alzheimer's Disease, Motor Neurone Disease, ALS, and Parkinson's Disease. It will be a victory for the followers of the writings of Ron L. Hubbard.
It has always been accepted that hearsay evidence is not acceptable in a court of law, yet in the courtroom of Judge George Greer, this hearsay evidence, that did not emerge until at least 5 years after Terri was left brain damaged that Michael Schiavo suddenly remembers that Terri did not want to remain alive in that state. On the other hand, Michael Schiavo's girlfriend at the time stated that Michael had stated to her that Terri had not made such a request. This evidence was also ignored by Judge George Greer.
If Terri Schiavo had made a Living Will, in which she had set out her wishes in the event of being incapacitated, then the court would have been able to make a determination based upon the contents of such a will. The Catholic Church has guidelines about what is acceptable for a Living Will format, and if Terri had thought that such a will was necessary then no doubt she would have followed the accepted format. However, this is not the case. Terri did not leave explicit instructions for her well-being in the event of being incapacitated.
What is the implications of the lack of a Living Will in this case? First of all it has left a severely brain damaged woman open to physical and psychological abuse by her husband as he continues to try and have her killed by the state. The attempt to have Terri starved and dehydrated to death is an abuse of the due process of the law.
Second, it has left the way open for Terri to be abused by people who are unknown to her, to use her as a pawn in their attempt to impose state approved general euthanasia as a result of any court decision to pull out the feeding tube from Terri. Yes, Terri is being used by the pro-euthanasia lobby in Florida that includes the lawyers for Michael Schiavo, George Felos and Deborah Bushnell. This lobby has one goal in mind where this case is concerned and that is to oversee the death of Terri Schindler-Schiavo so that they can claim a victory for their "right to die" agenda, that is the culture of death.
Third, there is a more general implication for severely disabled people who do not have the capacity to make an informed decision to have a Living Will. If Terri Schiavo loses her life as a result of a decision in a court of law, then all those who have a physical or mental disability are at risk of someone applying to the courts to have them killed too. The way is also open for situations where people who have been in a long term coma are considered to be a drain upon society and their lives could be terminated.
The lack of a Living Will means that Terri should be protected by the courts so that her husband cannot do what he has proposed doing to her. Since she is not on life support equipment, and she is not comatose in her bed, then Justice Greer had no right to accept the hearsay evidence of Michael Schiavo and grant the request to put this young woman to death by a slow and painful process. It is a slap in the face to all who have some form of incapacity and disability that their rights can be overridden in this manner.
Who is the beneficiary of pushing for the acceptance of hearsay evidence? The true beneficiary is the pro-euthanasia lobby. It is not Terri Schiavo because she has been sentenced to die slowly and painfully. It is not those who have incapacitating disability, especially the vulnerable babies that are born with defects, including an incapacity such as cystic fibrosis, spina bifida, heart defects and Downs Syndrome. It is a decision that threatens the life of the elderly and especially those who suffer from Alzheimer's Disease, Motor Neurone Disease, ALS, and Parkinson's Disease. It will be a victory for the followers of the writings of Ron L. Hubbard.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Right to choose abortion = Right to euthanasia
Do you remember the days when induced abortion was illegal? In those days the women marched in the streets demanding the right to kill their unborn children. At that time abortion doctors such as the Australian Bertram Wainer were charged with the crime of procuring abortion. Then the courts intervened so that unborn babies are no longer protected by the law. The ride down the slippery slope had begun.
Once the way was opened to "legal" abortion on demand, the culture of death began in earnest its plan to decimate life. Mothers-to-be over the age of 30 and under the age of 16 have been placed under intense pressure as to whether or not they should continue with their pregnancies. Older mothers were convinced that they should have the risky amniocentesis test to ensure that the infant in the womb did not carry the gene for Down's Syndrome. Younger mothers-to-be were told that they ran certain risks if they continued with the pregnancy. However, the risk of mental illness as a result of not having the child, plus a higher risk for breast cancer and other cancers were never explained to these women. Instead they were invited to kill their infants in the name of having the perfect child. Since that embyronic stage of legal abortion on demand there have been more and more abuses of babies that have crept into the system.
Can you imagine what it is like for a young mother-to-be, who has carried her baby for 9 months in the womb, and the child is ready to enter into the world. There is a problem, and the labour proper does not begin. She is sent home because she is not showing signs of commencing labour. Then she returns to the hospital and this time, when she is examined she is told that the baby's heart is weak? What procedure should have followed for this mother and infant to ensure the survival of the child? Caesarian section, right? Wrong answer. I agree that a thinking doctor and medical staff should have rushed that young mother off to emergency for a caesarian section. That is exactly what did not happen. The mother was told that her infant's heart was weak and he was allowed to die in the womb. Then on the following day the medical staff brought on the labour. The girl, husband and their respective families were devastated by the death of her first child, a little boy named Nathan. Did he have a disease? No. The autopsy showed that there was nothing wrong with Nathan. He was a perfect child. He was strangled in the womb by the umbilical cord being wrapped around his neck. Nathan had struggled to survive and the doctor who made the decision to let him die showed no mercy towards this infant who is my great-nephew. This is the kind of misadventure that will continue to occur unless the abortionists are brought to heel and abortion on demand is made illegal once again. It will be allowed to continue because the abortion industry has caused doctors to disregard all possible means of ensuring a safe delivery for both baby in the womb and mother.
The issue of abortion is only the beginning, since the next step in the chain is that of euthanasia. It did not take long to discover that medical staff have taken it upon themselves to kill weak infants by smothering them to death. Once they have gotten away with that crime, it was not long before the medical staff were clamouring to be allowed to kill adults whom they considered too weak to continue to survive. This is the point where the Hippocratic Oath has gone out of the door. When doctors were required to take the Hippocratic Oath, they upheld the right for every human being to live. Now they clamour to kill those who are not able to fend for themselves.
There are several streams in the euthanasia debate because of the different categories for a comatose patient as well as those who are mentally incapable of looking after themselves. There is no doubt that if a patient is showing no signs of life, that is, there are no brainwaves, and that person is being kept artificially alive due to being attached to a machine, then a family has the right to make the decision to pull the plug and allow God to do the rest. However, no one should have the right to withdraw treatment and food from someone who is allegedly in a vegetative state unless all signs of life are non-existent. Allowing a dying patient to go peacefully is not a crime, yet on the other hand, if someone helps another person to commit suicide then that is a crime.
Voluntary euthanasia has been a hot topic for more than 20 years. There are people who are prepared to commit suicide for the cause of the Hemlock society, to have the right to "choose" when to die. They talk of death with dignity but they are unwilling to extend that same "dignity" to those who are considered to be amongst the "unfit to remain alive" category. This is the perception that we see in the Terri Schindler-Schiavo case. Someone - namely Michael Schiavo, Terri's "loving" husband - has decided that Terri must not be allowed to live, despite the fact that she had begun responding to the rehabilitation that she had received. In fact, Michael Schiavo has cut off his wife from all attempts to rehabilitate her so that she can function on her own. Does Michael Schiavo have something to hide from the law about Terri's condition?
Terri is severely disabled because oxygen was cut off from her brain for approximately 8-10 minutes. Michael Schiavo claims that Terri fell as she had a heart attack. The reason sounds plausible, except that Terri is not showing any signs of having a heart attack that has been brought on by low potassium levels in the blood. There is a division of opinion about what happened, yet a leading forensic pathologist in New York has stated that Terri showed signs of strangulation and that she lost the oxygen as she was being asphyxiated. The extent and extreme disability of Terri seems to indicate that she suffered an extremely severe trauma that put her into a coma in hospital.
Terri Schiavo is not alone in her fight to remain alive. When some of the decisions that have been made in this case are examined in the light of day, it is not difficult to see the subterfuge that is taking place in order to pave the way to kill others who are considered to be nothing more than non persons, or in the terminology of Scientology, those who have no right to exist because of their severe incapacities. There is another Florida case that deserves a better airing since the parents of the girl want to sue somebody for her wrongful death. The girl is Lisa McPherson. She died in mysterious circumstances. The "church" of Scientology were charged over her death, but some of the witnesses did not step forward. Lisa belonged to the Church of Scientology before her death. In fact she was on Scientology premises when she collapsed and was rushed to hospital. Lisa had a mental break down, and she was taken by other Scientologists to a place where she was held as a captive. She was put on the "run down" for death, and over a period of 7 days she very slowly dehydrated to death.
Who, more than any other group advocates that the mentally and physically disabled should be put down? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Ron L. Hubbard. Is there a connection between the followers of Ron L. Hubbard and the people who are wanting to oversee the death of Terri Schiavo?
Once the way was opened to "legal" abortion on demand, the culture of death began in earnest its plan to decimate life. Mothers-to-be over the age of 30 and under the age of 16 have been placed under intense pressure as to whether or not they should continue with their pregnancies. Older mothers were convinced that they should have the risky amniocentesis test to ensure that the infant in the womb did not carry the gene for Down's Syndrome. Younger mothers-to-be were told that they ran certain risks if they continued with the pregnancy. However, the risk of mental illness as a result of not having the child, plus a higher risk for breast cancer and other cancers were never explained to these women. Instead they were invited to kill their infants in the name of having the perfect child. Since that embyronic stage of legal abortion on demand there have been more and more abuses of babies that have crept into the system.
Can you imagine what it is like for a young mother-to-be, who has carried her baby for 9 months in the womb, and the child is ready to enter into the world. There is a problem, and the labour proper does not begin. She is sent home because she is not showing signs of commencing labour. Then she returns to the hospital and this time, when she is examined she is told that the baby's heart is weak? What procedure should have followed for this mother and infant to ensure the survival of the child? Caesarian section, right? Wrong answer. I agree that a thinking doctor and medical staff should have rushed that young mother off to emergency for a caesarian section. That is exactly what did not happen. The mother was told that her infant's heart was weak and he was allowed to die in the womb. Then on the following day the medical staff brought on the labour. The girl, husband and their respective families were devastated by the death of her first child, a little boy named Nathan. Did he have a disease? No. The autopsy showed that there was nothing wrong with Nathan. He was a perfect child. He was strangled in the womb by the umbilical cord being wrapped around his neck. Nathan had struggled to survive and the doctor who made the decision to let him die showed no mercy towards this infant who is my great-nephew. This is the kind of misadventure that will continue to occur unless the abortionists are brought to heel and abortion on demand is made illegal once again. It will be allowed to continue because the abortion industry has caused doctors to disregard all possible means of ensuring a safe delivery for both baby in the womb and mother.
The issue of abortion is only the beginning, since the next step in the chain is that of euthanasia. It did not take long to discover that medical staff have taken it upon themselves to kill weak infants by smothering them to death. Once they have gotten away with that crime, it was not long before the medical staff were clamouring to be allowed to kill adults whom they considered too weak to continue to survive. This is the point where the Hippocratic Oath has gone out of the door. When doctors were required to take the Hippocratic Oath, they upheld the right for every human being to live. Now they clamour to kill those who are not able to fend for themselves.
There are several streams in the euthanasia debate because of the different categories for a comatose patient as well as those who are mentally incapable of looking after themselves. There is no doubt that if a patient is showing no signs of life, that is, there are no brainwaves, and that person is being kept artificially alive due to being attached to a machine, then a family has the right to make the decision to pull the plug and allow God to do the rest. However, no one should have the right to withdraw treatment and food from someone who is allegedly in a vegetative state unless all signs of life are non-existent. Allowing a dying patient to go peacefully is not a crime, yet on the other hand, if someone helps another person to commit suicide then that is a crime.
Voluntary euthanasia has been a hot topic for more than 20 years. There are people who are prepared to commit suicide for the cause of the Hemlock society, to have the right to "choose" when to die. They talk of death with dignity but they are unwilling to extend that same "dignity" to those who are considered to be amongst the "unfit to remain alive" category. This is the perception that we see in the Terri Schindler-Schiavo case. Someone - namely Michael Schiavo, Terri's "loving" husband - has decided that Terri must not be allowed to live, despite the fact that she had begun responding to the rehabilitation that she had received. In fact, Michael Schiavo has cut off his wife from all attempts to rehabilitate her so that she can function on her own. Does Michael Schiavo have something to hide from the law about Terri's condition?
Terri is severely disabled because oxygen was cut off from her brain for approximately 8-10 minutes. Michael Schiavo claims that Terri fell as she had a heart attack. The reason sounds plausible, except that Terri is not showing any signs of having a heart attack that has been brought on by low potassium levels in the blood. There is a division of opinion about what happened, yet a leading forensic pathologist in New York has stated that Terri showed signs of strangulation and that she lost the oxygen as she was being asphyxiated. The extent and extreme disability of Terri seems to indicate that she suffered an extremely severe trauma that put her into a coma in hospital.
Terri Schiavo is not alone in her fight to remain alive. When some of the decisions that have been made in this case are examined in the light of day, it is not difficult to see the subterfuge that is taking place in order to pave the way to kill others who are considered to be nothing more than non persons, or in the terminology of Scientology, those who have no right to exist because of their severe incapacities. There is another Florida case that deserves a better airing since the parents of the girl want to sue somebody for her wrongful death. The girl is Lisa McPherson. She died in mysterious circumstances. The "church" of Scientology were charged over her death, but some of the witnesses did not step forward. Lisa belonged to the Church of Scientology before her death. In fact she was on Scientology premises when she collapsed and was rushed to hospital. Lisa had a mental break down, and she was taken by other Scientologists to a place where she was held as a captive. She was put on the "run down" for death, and over a period of 7 days she very slowly dehydrated to death.
Who, more than any other group advocates that the mentally and physically disabled should be put down? The answer to this question can be found in the writings of Ron L. Hubbard. Is there a connection between the followers of Ron L. Hubbard and the people who are wanting to oversee the death of Terri Schiavo?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
