« And you'll never be alone again, Mathilda* | Main | magnetic »

more on the Schiavo story - linking back

I'm trying to read around the blogs in regards to Terri Schiavo, but the sheer number of posts on this story is overwhelming. I do want to point interested readers to some of the posts I have read today, including people who have responded to what I wrote earlier.

Goldstein has a round up of links here.

I was Godwin-ed here, along with Janus and Andy. Janus responds here.

Long discussion thread at Daily Pundit here.

Everything you wanted to know about the case here, in unbiased fashion.

Another long blog discussion at INDC.

Ongoing coverage at Blogcritics.

Judith Weiss
weighs in, as do Ilyka and Andrea.

Another long discussion on a guest post at Roger Simon's.

I'd say this issue is somewhat polarizing, even amongst people who have historically been on the same side of things, politically.

Drop any links you have in the comments, I'll add them on. No matter what side you fall on with this issue, the discussion on most blog posts are interesting and, for the most part, informative.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference more on the Schiavo story - linking back:

» Fear, Loathing & Determination In The Terri Schiavo Case from The Moderate Voice
Right now the most miserable job in the world belongs to federal U.S. District Judge James Whittemore who is deciding on whether to order a fe... [Read More]


My thoughts


Share & Enjoy

Surprisingly, Nazi references aside, the discussion is surprisingly civil. And despite such non sequiturs as a CT scan can't prove the nonexistence of brain activity therefore Terri must be completely awake and alert, and suggestions that those who support Michael Schiavo's rights as her legal guardian automatically must support the "mercy killing" of anyone who is mentally retarded, and histrionic accounts of death by dehydration using a healthy, conscious, athletic 20-something as a hypothetical case-in-point, the discussion has remained in impressively logical terms.

What isn't getting a lot of discussion from the "Save Terri" crowd is the pretty disgusting political nature of their support in Congress.

Remember how I said politics makes my head all hurty? This is more along the lines of asplodey. Even if someone had God's own insight into the case, nobody would listen. Everyone's too busy piling up their little soapboxes, so they can be higher than the next guy.

/* end holier-than-thou comment

Whichever side of this you come down on, fill out, sign, and notarize your living wills, so that we do not need to have this circus again if you should (God forbid) end up in such a condition.

"Pretty please", if that will help you, "with strawberries and whipped cream, too!"

US Living Will Registry:


If you don't have one, get one.

Thank you for the link, Michele. Low marks to EO for calling you a Nazi for writing that last post; all you did was state your personal feelings on the subject, and that's all any other blogger is doing, whatever side they come down on it.

It is a polarizing subject, but only to the extent that people let it be. I'm not going on a mad delinking spree based on others' opinions about this. I would hope others don't either.

I have been avoiding all the news and posts about this but I am worried this will become the next "No compromise!" issue like abortion and we all know how well the courts and legislature have put that one to rest.


Professor Bainbridge has a good discussion:


Heres me take on the whole thing:

Here's mine. Please don't take offense at the "I don't care whether anyone else would like to live like that" part.


Jim K: "courts and the legislature?" The legislature is forbidden to do a thing about abortion: this is one of the definitive issues in that debate.

Michelle, allow me to contribute the following link:


Well hell, I went to that evangelist guy's webpage expecting to read a "You Nazis!" shriekfest and instead found a pretty levelheaded caution of how we should all beware our inner Nazis. After all, Nazis were people too, who thought they were doing good things for humanity by curing it of sickness and weakness. Of course, they were evil, for two basic reasons: their methods were to kill the sick and the weak (not to mention the perceived-to-be-weak: Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, other "deviants"), and two, because they thought that the human race could be made perfect. But the fear (and fear-caused hatred) of the sick, weak, or different always lies just under the surface of every human soul; don't think because you've grown up in nice, safe, civilized America that you aren't susceptible to evil. In fact, there is ample evidence that the more civilized and intelligent are more, not less, vulnerable to evil than people who have grown up in rougher circumstances. Germany wasn't a nation of thugs and barbarians before Hitler came to power; it was widely famed as one of the most civilized countries in Europe, producer of great composers, writers, and poets.

Anyway, that's how I read it. It's too bad that the subject of Hitler and the Nazis has become such blog-cooties because of some silly argument on Usenet in 1995.

I mentioned the polarization here:

An analysis of one of the source documents here -



The Easter Recess


It's pretty simple -- I saw this on freerepublic.com and it sums it up perfectly:

Man "finds" Wife unconscious.
Man keeps Wife unconscious.
Man gets malpractice money for Wife.
Man wants Wife's money.
Man wants Wife dead so Man can have money.
Man gets Lawyer.
Lawyer is secret Hospice Chairman.
Lawyer promises Man that Wife will die at Hospice he Chairs...

Nuff said.