Friday, April 01, 2005
--- I ---
TERRI SCHIAVO IS DEAD.
From today's Straits Times (Pg. 3)
"Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged woman at the heart of a bitter legal dispute in the United States, has died, said a spokesman for her parents.
"Ms Schiavo, 41, died yesterday, soon after entering her 14th day with no nutrition or hydration. Her feeding tube was removed on March 18 after a court order.
"Her parents had fought in US courts to keep their daughter alive."
* * *
Back to the question: should euthanasia be allowed?
It should be enforced that such legalised killing should only go ahead if the terminally-ill or disabled patient says yes, because he/she is worried that his/her condition requires a lot of care and is raining problems upon her caretakers: physically, mentally and financially.
I quote from the today's copy of the Straits Times, Pg. 26:
"Courts had long sided with her husband and legal guardian, Mr Michael Schiavo, in ruling she would not have wanted to live in that condition and that she should be allowed to die."
SHE WOULD NOT. She is brain-damaged - she can't talk, so do you have the fucking right to decide whether she wants to live or not? What gives the state to control a person's life, it he/she hasn't done anything wrong? Of course, if you're a murderer, then you should be condemned to the gallows if you killed out of bloodshed.
What if she had wanted to live?
And the fact that it brings trouble to her family can be dispersed: her parents want her to live, which means they will gladly take care of their daughter as far as they can. If the husband doesn't want to care for his own wife, what gives him the thought that he should end her life so that it takes a weight off his chest? What kind of husband is this?
But she's dead now - what more can we argue about? The parents are grieving . . . I don't now how the husband and the courts feel.
--- II ---
Today's Straits Times, Page 26:
U.S. SPIES "DEAD WRONG" ON IRAQ
WASHINGTON: US intelligence on Iraq was "dead wrong", dealing a blow to American credibility that will take years to undo, and spymasters still know disturbingly little about nuclear programmes in countries like Iran and North Korea, a presidential commission reported yesterday.
The blunt report, based on over a year's investigation, gave a damning assessment of the intelligence that President George W. Bush used to launch the Iraq war and warned that flaws are still all too common throughout spy agencies.
"We conclude that the intelligence community was dead wrong in almost all of its pre-war judgements about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," the commissioners wrote. --- REUTERS.
Ho-ho-ho… Hong Kan liao. False information. If there was a world authority, or a world court, Bush should be court-marshalled and his title of President of the United States stripped.
And so should the CIA. Fucked-up, understand? Fucked-up!
¶ 4/01/2005 10:42:00 pm TERRI SCHIAVO IS DEAD.
From today's Straits Times (Pg. 3)
"Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged woman at the heart of a bitter legal dispute in the United States, has died, said a spokesman for her parents.
"Ms Schiavo, 41, died yesterday, soon after entering her 14th day with no nutrition or hydration. Her feeding tube was removed on March 18 after a court order.
"Her parents had fought in US courts to keep their daughter alive."
* * *
Back to the question: should euthanasia be allowed?
It should be enforced that such legalised killing should only go ahead if the terminally-ill or disabled patient says yes, because he/she is worried that his/her condition requires a lot of care and is raining problems upon her caretakers: physically, mentally and financially.
I quote from the today's copy of the Straits Times, Pg. 26:
"Courts had long sided with her husband and legal guardian, Mr Michael Schiavo, in ruling she would not have wanted to live in that condition and that she should be allowed to die."
SHE WOULD NOT. She is brain-damaged - she can't talk, so do you have the fucking right to decide whether she wants to live or not? What gives the state to control a person's life, it he/she hasn't done anything wrong? Of course, if you're a murderer, then you should be condemned to the gallows if you killed out of bloodshed.
What if she had wanted to live?
And the fact that it brings trouble to her family can be dispersed: her parents want her to live, which means they will gladly take care of their daughter as far as they can. If the husband doesn't want to care for his own wife, what gives him the thought that he should end her life so that it takes a weight off his chest? What kind of husband is this?
But she's dead now - what more can we argue about? The parents are grieving . . . I don't now how the husband and the courts feel.
--- II ---
Today's Straits Times, Page 26:
U.S. SPIES "DEAD WRONG" ON IRAQ
WASHINGTON: US intelligence on Iraq was "dead wrong", dealing a blow to American credibility that will take years to undo, and spymasters still know disturbingly little about nuclear programmes in countries like Iran and North Korea, a presidential commission reported yesterday.
The blunt report, based on over a year's investigation, gave a damning assessment of the intelligence that President George W. Bush used to launch the Iraq war and warned that flaws are still all too common throughout spy agencies.
"We conclude that the intelligence community was dead wrong in almost all of its pre-war judgements about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," the commissioners wrote. --- REUTERS.
Ho-ho-ho… Hong Kan liao. False information. If there was a world authority, or a world court, Bush should be court-marshalled and his title of President of the United States stripped.
And so should the CIA. Fucked-up, understand? Fucked-up!
