[Marxism] Terri Shiavo: what the doctors say...

davidquarter at sympatico.ca davidquarter at sympatico.ca
Tue Mar 29 04:14:35 MST 2005

 Yes..you're so bright, Joaquam..how did you guess.?

 The tone and structure of the article (in terms of the way the discussion is  
presented, i.e., life vs death, and as far as introducing the pro-life  argument  and  
then "refuting" it with the  "expect" testimony) is so clearly slanted in favour of the 
husband killer...your darling...I wasn't my intention to "prove" my position by posting 
this article. And even if I believed that Shiavo couldn't in fact distinguish the earth 
from the sun  (no pun indended) it wouldn't change my position, which is, primarily 
and principally, to oppose "mercy" killing on the grounds that it is form of eugenics 
with justications for it that harks back to the days of Hilter. In fact I was well aware 
that the article (at face) gives more credence  to the killer's position. Still there are 
points raised in the article where it isn't so clear, for example:" Bradley, who has not 
examined Schiavo, did not attempt to say whether she is in a persistent vegetative 
state. But he said that for someone who is in this state, "there is no conscious 
perception of pain." 
... UNlike yourself, I am open to hearing both sides of ANY argument and will read 
and even post from positions that I happen to disagree with...And where the 
evidence seems compelling, modify my position...My comments below were meant 
to show the irony that of all the so-called "expects" cited by name in the article, it 
turns out only one (mea culpa!) had actually examined Terri in person...ALso with 
this doctor, he draws a conclusion and is then introduced to evidence that contradict 
it and then, of course (and from long distance!) reafirms his original 
conclusion...Would you  expect otherwise from an "expert" that probably gets paid 
big bucks as a medical consultant and therefore has an obvious stake in maitaining 
his reputation?

What I am more curious about... is whether the below a modification of your Papist 
Plot theory?
And if so, where does the pope exactly fit in?

On 28 Mar 2005 at 23:48, Joaquín Bustelo wrote:

> David Quarters says: "[Interesting how none of the doctors mentioned by name
> in the article who side with the husband have actually examined Terri in
> person...hmmm]"
> If this as good an argument as you can come up with? That the people the St.
> Pete Times decided to talk to haven't examined Terri in person? 
> But, in point of fact, in your pursuit of pimping for the Papists, you lie
> about the content of the article:
> *  *  *
> Dr. Ron Cranford, a Minneapolis neurologist, examined Schiavo after an
> appellate court in 2001 ordered additional medical review. He said she was
> not able to follow movement with her eyes. "Terri doesn't do any of that.
> She has no sustained visual pursuit. And that's the hallmark of the
> vegetative state," he said by telephone on Monday.

More information about the Marxism mailing list