Terri Schiavo's Parents Seek Divorce on Her Behalf - Page 17

Happy Monkey · 03-30-2005, 04:18 PM

Doncha know that "liberalism" is a communicable disease that's spread by the interchange of ideas? The entire judiciary has been infected, and must be replaced by GW Bush appointees!

jinx · 03-30-2005, 05:06 PM

I wonder if stem cell research would have helped Terri?

Happy Monkey · 03-30-2005, 05:18 PM

Well, not her in particular. Research doesn't move that quickly. And even if it reached the full theoretical maturity, replacing a damaged section of brain with fresh cells, the information encoded in the dead cells is gone, and at best she would be restored to babyhood. Better than death, but it wouldn't have helped "Terri" so much as give Terri's body a second chance at becoming a person.

bluesdave · 03-30-2005, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Well, not her in particular. Research doesn't move that quickly. And even if it reached the full theoretical maturity, replacing a damaged section of brain with fresh cells, the information encoded in the dead cells is gone, and at best she would be restored to babyhood. Better than death, but it wouldn't have helped "Terri" so much as give Terri's body a second chance at becoming a person.

I know it's a little off topic, but you have hit on the very reason why "life after death" is an impossibility. People seem to forget that what they think, what they remember, their emotions, etc. are all stored in cells within their body, and yet they expect that when they die, somehow that all gets transfered into their "spirit". Crazy!

"Believers" are going cite people like James Van Praagh, and ask if it's not true, how do they do what they do. I think there is a perfectly logical, scientific explanation for his abilities, which I won't go into here, mixed in with a fair amount of good old Vaudeville showmanship. And, yes, I am impressed with his skills.

Happy Monkey · 03-30-2005, 07:13 PM

Life after death people (not me) would probably say either

1) Memories are lost anyway on death, as the soul is separate from the mind, (ie reincarnation)

or

2) Loss of brain function merely disrupts the connection between the soul's uncorrupted memory and the conscious mind.

James Van Praagh and John Edward are carnies, and aren't really relevant to any real religious discussions. I may think that they are equally incorrect as the Pope, but the Pope actually believes the things he says.

bluesdave · 03-30-2005, 07:48 PM

Isn't #2 what I just said?

Happy Monkey · 03-30-2005, 08:47 PM

I don't think so. You said that on death memories would be copied from brain to spirit. My #2 would be that memories are stored by the soul, and the brain just provides access to the soul. But I may have misinterpreted you.

bluesdave · 03-30-2005, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

I don't think so. You said that on death memories would be copied from brain to spirit. My #2 would be that memories are stored by the soul, and the brain just provides access to the soul. But I may have misinterpreted you.

Yes, but the point is that we now have scientifically backed evidence that memories are in fact stored in various parts of the body - not all in the brain, btw. The "believers" (not me - I thought I made that pretty clear), think that either the memories get transfered at death, or, as you say, the soul keeps the memories (or a copy of them), all through a person's life. From an Evolutionary point of view, that would be extremely inefficient, and nature tends towards efficiency.

Beestie · 03-30-2005, 09:59 PM

A believer (of which I am one) takes it on faith that God is universally aware. Therefore (if the premise is accepted), it is not difficult to conjure a scenario where God reposits those memories elsewhere.

That isn't to say I accept the idea personally, just that people of faith have a pre-existing belief system which easily supports the possibility.

I didn't catch how that relates to the presumed efficiency of evolution. I'm not sure evolution is efficient - it just "is." Efficient implies that one path to an end is superior in some way to another path as well as implying a designed process. A non-believer cannot accept the notion that evolution is anything but a series of interrelateded causes and effects that is unconcerned with its final disposition.

bluesdave · 03-30-2005, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beestie

I didn't catch how that relates to the presumed efficiency of evolution. I'm not sure evolution is efficient - it just "is." Efficient implies that one path to an end is superior in some way to another path as well as implying a designed process. A non-believer cannot accept the notion that evolution is anything but a series of interrelateded causes and effects that is unconcerned with its final disposition.

I was generalising, but you clearly don't understand evolution. You being a "believer" makes that understandable. Evolution is constantly experimenting. The general trend is towards a more efficiently running organism. Some species don't work out, and so drop off the tree. Others either continue with little or moderate change (eg. sharks, crocodiles), or evolve into something completely different (eg. whales).

I think this particular debate has been done to death in other threads, so I'll leave it at that.

Happy Monkey · 03-30-2005, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesdave

The "believers" (not me - I thought I made that pretty clear),

I realized that, I was just paraphrasing the argument your theoretical believer was using.

wolf · 03-31-2005, 01:57 AM

Radio commentator Rollye James, always on the lookout for a good conspiracy theory, pointed out tonight that Pinellas Park, Florida is the HQ of the "Church" of Scientology, and their doctrine may well play into some of the goings on ...

Because of the way WPHT broadcasts her show, hours 2-4, followed by hour 1, since her first on-air hour is filled by Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor, I caught the beginning of her show on the way home from work tonight. She was supposed to focus further on the broad hints of interesting content that she gave during the show lead in, but I missed the rest.

I was completely fucking astonished by a report I saw last night on Michael's lawyer, who is some kind of a mystic in addition to being a lawyer ... apparently in a book that he wrote on his work in "end of life issues" he discussed having "soul spoken" to a client in a persistent vegetative state and from that knew that her wish was to die.

I thought he looked flaky when he was describing how serene and peaceful Terry looked ... right around the time they started shooting her up with morphine because she was thrashing around and moaning too much.

Some exceprts

available from amazon.com

note to the reader. This post was stolen wholesale from an earlier post this evening on The Ciberbosque

Home of the Whale Penis Thread, in case you forgot

Griff · 03-31-2005, 07:37 AM

I'm not one to argue for government intervention, but what is the harm in letting her parents take care of her?

Or put another way, why do we need to kill her by withholding food? We are perched on the edge of a slope we had to roll the boulder up last century. Brain injury, mental capacity, senility, autism, retardation, age, race, social status... Barring a living will or an unimpeachable source of information of her wishes, do we really have the right to make this decision? I thought I was cool with this until I listened to Rabbi Gelman on the issue. Is a feeding tube really an extraordinary measure? I'd feel a whole lot better if the family had reached a consensus about her condition. I know my opinion doesn't count since its based, in part, in a belief about the source of life, but I don't want folks to think the entire cellar has reached a conclusive position on this. I don't even know if I've reached a conclusive position on this. We do need to understand that neither side's position is based on pure reason.

Happy Monkey · 03-31-2005, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff

I know my opinion doesn't count since its based, in part, in a belief about the source of life,

That's not why your opinion doesn't count. None of our opinions count, and the opinion of the lawyers doesn't count, and the opinion of the judges doesn't count. We aren't her husband. Sure, it would be nice if he and the parents hadn't had a falling out, but things aren't always nice, and the order of responsibility is:

self
spouse
adult children
parents

Griff · 03-31-2005, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

self
spouse
adult children
parents

True. Rule of law should mean something.

03-30-2005, 04:18 PM	#241
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Doncha know that "liberalism" is a communicable disease that's spread by the interchange of ideas? The entire judiciary has been infected, and must be replaced by GW Bush appointees! __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-30-2005, 05:06 PM	#242
jinx Come on, cat. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: general vicinity of Philadelphia area Posts: 7,013	I wonder if stem cell research would have helped Terri? __________________ Crying won't help you, praying won't do you no good.

03-30-2005, 05:18 PM	#243
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Well, not her in particular. Research doesn't move that quickly. And even if it reached the full theoretical maturity, replacing a damaged section of brain with fresh cells, the information encoded in the dead cells is gone, and at best she would be restored to babyhood. Better than death, but it wouldn't have helped "Terri" so much as give Terri's body a second chance at becoming a person. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-30-2005, 07:13 PM	#245
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Life after death people (not me) would probably say either 1) Memories are lost anyway on death, as the soul is separate from the mind, (ie reincarnation) or 2) Loss of brain function merely disrupts the connection between the soul's uncorrupted memory and the conscious mind. James Van Praagh and John Edward are carnies, and aren't really relevant to any real religious discussions. I may think that they are equally incorrect as the Pope, but the Pope actually believes the things he says. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-30-2005, 07:48 PM	#246
bluesdave Getting older every day Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 308	Isn't #2 what I just said? __________________ History is a great teacher; it is a shame that people never learn from it.

03-30-2005, 08:47 PM	#247
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	I don't think so. You said that on death memories would be copied from brain to spirit. My #2 would be that memories are stored by the soul, and the brain just provides access to the soul. But I may have misinterpreted you. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

03-30-2005, 09:59 PM	#249
Beestie -◊\|≡·∙■·∙≡\|◊- Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Parts unknown. Posts: 4,081	A believer (of which I am one) takes it on faith that God is universally aware. Therefore (if the premise is accepted), it is not difficult to conjure a scenario where God reposits those memories elsewhere. That isn't to say I accept the idea personally, just that people of faith have a pre-existing belief system which easily supports the possibility. I didn't catch how that relates to the presumed efficiency of evolution. I'm not sure evolution is efficient - it just "is." Efficient implies that one path to an end is superior in some way to another path as well as implying a designed process. A non-believer cannot accept the notion that evolution is anything but a series of interrelateded causes and effects that is unconcerned with its final disposition. __________________ ♠ ♥ ♣ ♦

03-31-2005, 01:57 AM	#252
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	Radio commentator Rollye James, always on the lookout for a good conspiracy theory, pointed out tonight that Pinellas Park, Florida is the HQ of the "Church" of Scientology, and their doctrine may well play into some of the goings on ... Because of the way WPHT broadcasts her show, hours 2-4, followed by hour 1, since her first on-air hour is filled by Bill O'Reilly's Radio Factor, I caught the beginning of her show on the way home from work tonight. She was supposed to focus further on the broad hints of interesting content that she gave during the show lead in, but I missed the rest. I was completely fucking astonished by a report I saw last night on Michael's lawyer, who is some kind of a mystic in addition to being a lawyer ... apparently in a book that he wrote on his work in "end of life issues" he discussed having "soul spoken" to a client in a persistent vegetative state and from that knew that her wish was to die. I thought he looked flaky when he was describing how serene and peaceful Terry looked ... right around the time they started shooting her up with morphine because she was thrashing around and moaning too much. Some exceprts available from amazon.com note to the reader. This post was stolen wholesale from an earlier post this evening on The Ciberbosque Home of the Whale Penis Thread, in case you forgot __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-31-2005, 07:37 AM	#253
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	I'm not one to argue for government intervention, but what is the harm in letting her parents take care of her? Or put another way, why do we need to kill her by withholding food? We are perched on the edge of a slope we had to roll the boulder up last century. Brain injury, mental capacity, senility, autism, retardation, age, race, social status... Barring a living will or an unimpeachable source of information of her wishes, do we really have the right to make this decision? I thought I was cool with this until I listened to Rabbi Gelman on the issue. Is a feeding tube really an extraordinary measure? I'd feel a whole lot better if the family had reached a consensus about her condition. I know my opinion doesn't count since its based, in part, in a belief about the source of life, but I don't want folks to think the entire cellar has reached a conclusive position on this. I don't even know if I've reached a conclusive position on this. We do need to understand that neither side's position is based on pure reason. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)