Judge rejects right-to-die delay

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


So what's the stake? What kind of slander are you going to engage in against Schiavo?

Why is it impossible to believe that he loves her and is fulfilling a commitment he made to her? Maybe he believes what her family wants is the wrong thing to do?

I havent slandered him yet have I, why would I start now. I simply think the man has other intrest in this besides her wishes. I mentioned money one time here and not again.Truth be known I think its a life insuance policy but that is my opinion and not a fact.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


So what's the stake? What kind of slander are you going to engage in against Schiavo?

And I don't know what makes someone an ass?

Accusations like that are a good start.

If you are going to accuse her of something, at least use the proper term.

It's libel, not slander

Look it up.

ACK!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
I havent slandered him yet have I, why would I start now. I simply think the man has other intrest in this besides her wishes.

Um, that's a contradiction in two sentences. There's no evidence of such "other" interests, and implying that he's out for some sort of gain is indeed slanderous [note to Tuberski: if you read the dictionary, you'll note that "slander" is a perfectly acceptable word choice in this context, since I'm not making a legal argument].

I mentioned money one time here and not again.Truth be known I think its a life insuance policy but that is my opinion and not a fact.

Schiavo turned down offers of millions of dollars to hand over the rights of his wife. If he was out for money, why not take those and walk away scot free?

The life insurance thing is ludicrous. That's not how such policies worked. Indeed, by authorizing the removal of the feeding tube, he'd be nullifying any life insurance policy there might be in the first place!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Tuberski
Not at all, when you argue with an ass(me), you look like an ass.

Actually, people argue with asses all the time and come out looking just fine. I'll reference you to www.talkorigins.org for a prime example.

[MRT144]

dude, let her die. shes a waste of space and anyone that can find something redeeming about her living is nuts.

[Sava]

anyone that can find something redeeming about her living is nuts.

QFT

[GePap]

Boris, what the hell does the character of the husband have to do with any of this?

You make a mistake by trying to defend him, as if that were of any value- by doing that you validate the notion that smearing him (which neither tubes nor the missus have done) is some sort of arguement.

This is NOt a complicated case, anymore than Elian Gonzales's case was complicated. One party has the legal right, and that has been recognized by the courts.

What is specialy and disturbing about this case is the willingness of groups and politicians to use it for thier own political and ideological ends.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by MRT144
dude, let her die. shes a waste of space and anyone that can find something redeeming about her living is nuts.

Let's kill all the retarded people out there too, then we can do it to lazy people , fat people.

The list goes on.

HEIL!

ACK!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by GePap
Boris, what the hell does the character of the husband have to do with any of this?

I don't think it does have anything to do with the legal ramifications of the case.

But there isn't any evidence his motives are sinister (and quite a bit indicating they aren't), so as a seperate issue, it chafes me to see people slandering him for the purposes of trying to futher their argument. Slandering him is just an example of the low, desperate tactics to which people will stoop to try and make any sort of case.

I don't think Schiavo is a saint by any means--he could be a total ass, for all I know. But in the absense of irrefutable evidence in favor of that assertion, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Tuberski


Let's kill all the retarded people out there too, then we can do it to lazy people , fat people.

The list goes on.

HEIL!

ACK!

oh the slippery slope argument...

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Sava
oh the slippery slope argument...

Isn't it?

This is the worst reason of all to let her die.

Do you know anything of Eugenics?

ACK!

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I have been asking that all night Boris. why doesnt he just walk away scott free?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Tuberski


Isn't it?

Do you know anything of Eugenics?

ACK!

actually, your argument might be more absurd than the gay marriage leads to beastiality argument... I find it offensive.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
I have been asking that all night Boris. why doesnt he just walk away scott free?

I repeat: because maybe he actually cares about her and wants to see what he believes is best for her take place? Why is this not possible to believe?

GePap also stated it:

As for why he does not simply walk away, well, given that financial reasons seem currently highly unlikely, maybe he trully feels this is a terrible state for the woman to be in, one no person should be in, and that it would be best for her to die.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
[note to Tuberski: if you read the dictionary, you'll note that "slander" is a perfectly acceptable word choice in this context, since I'm not making a legal argument].

Dictionary.com says:

A false and malicious statement or report about someone

My wife's statements weren't malicious. So you are wrong legally and in your context.

ACK!