Evidence for God from Science

It was not her request unless you can cough up a living will that states otherwise.

nameless wrote:ermm killing here is the default position as it is a request of terri schiavo not to be kept artificially alive.

And you know that this was her request because...?

nameless wrote:In anycase this whole thing is an issue because of the christian adherence to their dogmatic teaching that suicide is wrong.

I do believe non-Christians also sided with keeping Terri alive.

nameless wrote:Why is suicide even wrong?

I believe only someone who doesn't have much compassion for others could ask why suicide is wrong. Perhaps you should ask that question to people who have had a close one commit suicide?

nameless wrote:Also to dan, they have been keeping her alive for more than 10 years, (isnt that long enough) while inumerable medical examinations has conclusively established that terry schiavo is brain dead. All the reason to pull the plug.

Perhaps we should start culling all 10 year olds, after all isn't that long enough? Where do you pull such reasoning?

Additionally Terri was not entirely brain dead.

Kurieuo.

Actually, he sounds like these people I heard about on the radio a few years ago who were urging a woman to jump off a bridge because the police was blocking traffic when they were trying to talk her out of it.

And you know that this was her request because...?

Its a verified statement. Court examined etc... its so reported by AP, do I need to cut and paste the actual news here?

I do believe non-Christians also sided with keeping Terri alive.

I dont. The point here is that the issue is only an 'issue' because of christian politicians trying to enforce their dogmatic beliefs.

believe only someone who doesn't have much compassion for others could ask why suicide is wrong. Perhaps you should ask that question to people who have had a close one commit suicide?

My sister commited suicide when I was in my first year here, she has been suffering from long term depression and was in constant emotional pain. Though I feel sad and miss her dearly, I am glad that she doesnt have to feel any more pain...
so in this case, suicide is not wrong.

Perhaps we should start culling all 10 year olds, after all isn't that long enough? Where do you pull such reasoning?

Apparently you missed my point again, dan was saying that they should keep terri alive as there has not been enough time to determine her medical condition. I pointed out to him that she had been examined many times through the 10 years she has been paralyse. Your analogy fails horribly.

It is true that terri is not completely brain dead. I was using that term loosely.

Its a verified statement. Court examined etc... its so reported by AP, do I need to cut and paste the actual news here?

All the news show is a bunch of people's opinion. Unless there is a LEGAL document that states those were her wishes, you have no right to declare it absolute fact. hearsay does not constitute evidence in my eyes.


I dont. The point here is that the issue is only an 'issue' because of christian politicians trying to enforce their dogmatic beliefs.

Then you're a complete idiot, plain and simple. It took me less than 20 seconds to find this:

http://ravingatheist.com/archives/2005/ ... _terri.php

My sister commited suicide when I was in my first year here, she has been suffering from long term depression and was in constant emotional pain. Though I feel sad and miss her dearly, I am glad that she doesnt have to feel any more pain...
so in this case, suicide is not wrong.

So instead of helping her deal with it, kill her, eh? I can feel the love.

Apparently you missed my point again, dan was saying that they should keep terri alive as there has not been enough time to determine her medical condition. I pointed out to him that she had been examined many times through the 10 years she has been paralyse. Your analogy fails horribly.

Yes, examined by such unbiased and impartial physicians like "Dr. Death". All you are giving us here is propaganda from the same news stations that actually think her husbant rejected the 10 million dollar offer of his own free will (and conveniently "forgetting" the fact that he couldn't keep his side of the deal even if he wanted to without landing in jail)

sigh....

It has been legally verified the truth of micheal schiavo's statement that terri schiavo did not want to be kept alive artificially..

Then you're a complete idiot, plain and simple.

lol...

anyway my point is not there isnt atheist/buddhist/agnostics who do not support her being kept alive... so please dont link me sites of her atheist/buddhist/zorastian supporters..

So instead of helping her deal with it, kill her, eh? I can feel the love.

I did when she was alive, but supported her when she choose to take her life. I do not get why you would say I love her less for choosing the support her decision..

Yes, examined by such unbiased and impartial physicians like "Dr. Death".

lol. Nice nickname you coined for them and yes they are unbiased and impartial court appointed doctors.


[/quote]

nameless wrote:sigh....

It has been legally verified the truth of micheal schiavo's statement that terri schiavo did not want to be kept alive artificially..

It has also been legally verified that OJ Simpson didn't kill his wife. Are you saying that the justice sysem can do no wrong? Perhaps we should make slavery legal as well. After all, the infallible justice system approved of it!

lol...

anyway my point is not there isnt atheist/buddhist/agnostics who do not support her being kept alive... so please dont link me sites of her atheist/buddhist/zorastian supporters..

That was exactly your point. You said, and I quote:

"I dont. The point here is that the issue is only an 'issue' because of christian politicians trying to enforce their dogmatic beliefs. "

Or would you like to retract this statement and admit you have no point?

I did when she was alive, but supported her when she choose to take her life. I do not get why you would say I love her less for choosing the support her decision..

There is nothing wrong with encouraging suicide? My God, if you can "support somebody's decision" to kill themselves and still claim to love the person, then bring out the nobel peace prize. Hitler's corpse hath need of it.

lol. Nice nickname you coined for them and yes they are unbiased and impartial court appointed doctors.

No, actually, there really was a doctor who dubs himself "Dr. Death" on the husband's side...

The nicknames I coined for them are against the rules of the forum so I can't post them.

Sigh, I see you do not understand me well. I'll be as clear as possible.
The point again was not whether there is an absolute truth, since absolute truth is impossible to ascertain, what we can only hope to do is to make the fairest decision possible with our judicial system. In this case, Michael Schiavo statement under oath has to be granted legitimacy and taken to be a 'true' statement, and hence act in accordance, ie removing the tube.

"I dont. The point here is that the issue is only an 'issue' because of christian politicians trying to enforce their dogmatic beliefs. "

i normally refrain using the word idiot to describe people, but you're rapidly sounding like one. I'll give you a benefit of doubt and not post a detail logical outline of how you wrongly infer my point and let you figure it yourself. If you still cant only will I post a 'idiot proof' explanation.

There is nothing wrong with encouraging suicide? My God, if you can "support somebody's decision" to kill themselves and still claim to love the person, then bring out the nobel peace prize. Hitler's corpse hath need of it.

rhetorics have no place in proper discussion, either state a valid reason or zip it.

No, actually, there really was a doctor who dubs himself "Dr. Death" on the husband's side..

K, i thought you were being creative. How has that then made the various court appointed doctors being un impartial?


edit : ****** meant the word I D I O T, if its against forum rules to post words like this, I'll take it back

nameless wrote:Sigh, I see you do not understand me well. I'll be as clear as possible.
The point again was not whether there is an absolute truth, since absolute truth is impossible to ascertain, what we can only hope to do is to make the fairest decision possible with our judicial system. In this case, Michael Schiavo statement under oath has to be granted legitimacy and taken to be a 'true' statement, and hence act in accordance, ie removing the tube.

That's nice. However, this does not mean it's what she wanted. This is what the system thinks she wanted. Again, unless she tells us what she wanted either in person or through a legal document, then you don't know what she wanted.

i normally refrain using the word ***** to describe people, but you're rapidly sounding like one. I'll give you a benefit of doubt and not post a detail logical outline of how you wrongly infer my point and let you figure it yourself. If you still cant only will I post a '***** proof' explanation.

K's statement: "I do believe non-Christians also sided with keeping Terri alive."

Your statement: "I dont."

Care to explain how I was wrong? You basically said there was an issue because of "those damn Christians" when this is hardly the case, as there are plenty of Christians who wanted her dead(like my dad and sister) and plenty of atheists who didn't(like that link I sent you). As such, your conclusion was flawed. Not only that, but it also shows that not only are you brainwashed by the media, but are a stereotypical fundie atheist. I refer you to this list. See how many apply to you:

http://www.tektonics.org/parody/fundyath.html

rhetorics have no place in proper discussion, either state a valid reason or zip it.

Yes. I would like to be explained how you can believe that encouraging the complete destruction of your sister can be considered love(especially from an atheist's point of view, when there is no afterlife).
Out of curiosity, did your sister consult a priest(or any religious figure for that matter)? Or did she rely on the wonders of secular science to fix the chemical reactions in her brain that made her depressed.

K, i thought you were being creative. How has that then made the various court appointed doctors being un impartial?

The simple fact that she was not given basic tests required to diagnose PVS(MRI, CAT scan) is enough to make me think they were not impartial. And neurologists are split over whether she was in a PVS state or not. You're making it sound as if CNN knows what it's talking about(it doesn't),

edit : ****** meant the word I D I O T, if its against forum rules to post words like this, I'll take it back

Don't be too harsh on yourself. We all make mistakes.

That's nice. However, this does not mean it's what she wanted. This is what the system thinks she wanted. Again, unless she tells us what she wanted either in person or through a legal document, then you don't know what she wanted.

Yes, your basically right. May I add that your statement however did not invalidated my stance that killing her is the default position here.

K's statement: "I do believe non-Christians also sided with keeping Terri alive."

Your statement: "I dont."

Ahh.. now your sounding less like an idiot. I was stating that I as a non christian didnt sided with terri being kept alive.


Anyway I stand right that this is only issue because of the christian politicians trying to impose their religious will. The truth of this statement is not violated by the fact that it is not all chirstians support it and not atheist disapprove it. Do you need an explanation crutch again, as I hate to elaborate on obvious things.

Yes. I would like to be explained how you can believe that encouraging the complete destruction of your sister can be considered love

Ahh this question should have come first before you started your hitler rant etc... anyway for me its like this, an existence which is full of suffering is < then a non existence devoided of suffering. Simple. loving= wanting the better thing for the object of love. hence dying here is better.

The simple fact that she was not given basic tests required to diagnose PVS(MRI, CAT scan) is enough to make me think they were not impartial.

lol... look whos parroting propaganda brain washed view.
The required diagonosis for PVS as given by American Academy of Neurology has been followed by the said doctor. CT scan, clinical diagonsis, EEG scan... , you do realise that such a breach of protocol would have resulted in his immediate removal, suspension of license dont you,

Don't be too harsh on yourself. We all make mistakes.

we do indeed, we do indeed..

Ahh.. now your sounding less like an *****. I was stating that I as a non christian didnt sided with terri being kept alive.

No, that's not what you were trying to state. What you should have stated, perhaps. I recommend you actually pay attention to what you type in the future, to avoid giving out the wrong ideas.

Anyway I stand right that this is only issue because of the christian politicians trying to impose their religious will. The truth of this statement is not violated by the fact that it is not all chirstians support it and not atheist disapprove it. Do you need an explanation crutch again, as I hate to elaborate on obvious things.

No, you are still wrong. It is the PRO LIFE MOVEMENT that is causing this issue. Not all of them are christian, and not all christians are pro life. Get it through your thick skull. And what's wrong with Christian politicians trying to impose their will? You don't see me complaining about secularists imposing their will.

Ahh this question should have come first before you started your hitler rant etc... anyway for me its like this, an existence which is full of suffering is < then a non existence devoided of suffering. Simple. loving= wanting the better thing for the object of love. hence dying here is better.

Her death is better than her recovery?

lol... look whos parroting propaganda brain washed view.
The required diagonosis for PVS as given by American Academy of Neurology has been followed by the said doctor. CT scan, clinical diagonsis, EEG scan... Razz, you do realise that such a breach of protocol would have resulted in his immediate removal, suspension of license dont you, Wink

That's nice, except I got my info from a Florida nurse who knows the laws far better than you do. I don't even watch TV anymore. In addition, you are bringing up the infallability of the system again. If he is well connected, his removal is not necessarily a problem. And before you bring up the idea of me being "brainwashed", I'd like to point out that I was once a liberal and a deist(sort of), so I highly doubt that's the case.

No, that's not what you were trying to state

Lol... i guess i cant argue against a statement like that

No, you are still wrong. It is the PRO LIFE MOVEMENT that is causing this issue. Not all of them are christian, and not all christians are pro life. Get it through your thick skull. And what's wrong with Christian politicians trying to impose their will? You don't see me complaining about secularists imposing their will

again you're using the argument not all chirstians are pro life to refute my argument which unfortunately doesnt work . I let you have one more response before I outline the logical fallacy of your approach.

Her death is better than her recovery?

Nope. One to weight the likelihood of her recovery etc,.and I reach a general conclusion that death was the best way. Anyway if possible I want to stop discussing about my sister. I'm not comfortable with it.

That's nice, except I got my info from a Florida nurse who knows the laws far better than you do

Nice refutation , shall I link you the AAN website?

In addition, you are bringing up the infallability of the system again

who said the system is infallible, what the system is, is that when followed yields a statistical hig probability of correct diagnosis.

Anyway i missed this question

And what's wrong with Christian politicians trying to impose their will?

Lol... do we really need more examples of how a theological based government is incapable of governance. I mean look at the old europe and the contemporary middle east society..

again you're using the argument not all chirstians are pro life to refute my argument which unfortunately doesnt work Sad . I let you have one more response before I outline the logical fallacy of your approach.

Yes, it does work. Use proper terminology(PRO LIFE, NOT CHRISTIAN) or don't talk at all.

Nope. One to weight the likelihood of her recovery etc,.and I reach a general conclusion that death was the best way. Anyway if possible I want to stop discussing about my sister. I'm not comfortable with it.

As you wish.

Nice refutation Razz, shall I link you the AAN website?

Yes, please do.

who said the system is infallible, what the system is, is that when followed yields a statistical hig probability of correct diagnosis.

Irrelevant. Unless you can bring in hard evidence that the system did not make a mistake, I have absolutely no reason to accept its opinion, as it stands in contrast with the rest of the information made available to the public.

Lol... do we really need more examples of how a theological based government is incapable of governance. I mean look at the old europe and the contemporary middle east society..

As opposed to the economic powerhouses that atheist countries were under communism? Please.

What I said is that this issue has only become an issue because of christian etc. this holds true by the statement as the core group of instigators etc are christian. My statement stands, and please dont try a rebuttal for your own sake...

Yes, please do.

http://www.aan.com/professionals

I'm waiting for some lol replies from you

Irrelevant. Unless you can bring in hard evidence that the system did not make a mistake, I have absolutely no reason to accept its opinion, as it stands in contrast with the rest of the information made available to the public.

It is impossible to prove a case to 100% certainty that much can be said.
In where has the system erred? What information were made in public.

As opposed to the economic powerhouses that atheist countries were under communism?

empty rhetorics again lol...

As oppossed to liberal secularist government of the US.