🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 05:05:41 GMT, CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> wrote:

>Web wrote:
>> "Tom Barrister" <tombarrister@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
>> news:1111727838.356170.23130@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> 
>> 
>>>And please don't feed us the "She didn't want to live like this,"
>>>baloney.
>> 
>> 
>> You don't want the facts, huh?
>> 
>> 
>There seem to be a lot of folks like that.
>
>What I don't get is how/whether they'd honor her wishes if they'd
>been written down in a living will -- the arguments being used by
>the right wingers would seem to apply equally to that situation,
>so presumably they _still_ would want to keep her plugged in to
>extraordinary measures.  But I haven't heard any of them admit to
>an unwillingness to honor living wills.
>
>And if they _would_ honor her wishes if they were in a document,
>then they should honor her wishes _however_ expressed, and as
>determined by multiple courts after careful consideration of all
>the evidence.

You people are so gullible. 

She never expressed her wishes. If she had, she would have died a
decade ago.

Her husband, after 7 years, stated that she would not want to live
like this, based on conversations she had with her friends. According
to him, she never expressed an opinion to him. Now, how come those
"friends" have not come forth and stated what she wanted. How come
none of those friends ever appeared in any of the court proceedings?
Are they imaginary "friends"? Or are they convenient "friends", so
Michael can marry his girlfriend after Terri is dead?

Mike Smith