Terri's "Nobel Prize Nominated Doctor" Testimony Fake - Page 9

Mac6yver · #**121** Mar 28, '05, 10:40 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fix

Well, I follow the truth and there can only be one truth, not several.

I am not here to have a spiritual peeing contest with you. You have your beliefs I have mine.

Brad · #**122** Mar 28, '05, 10:42 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

I will accept the possibility that they are teling the truth, however I certainly would not hedge any bets on it. Would you admit the possibility that they are lying for their own agenda? No matter how slim it may be?

Anyone may lie. These nurses lost their jobs and testified under the penalty of perjury to these facts for no real gain to them. Pretty slim. Yet, you are willing to assume they are lying.

Mac6yver · #**123** Mar 28, '05, 10:42 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Again you completely ignore the people that have overcome such disabilities. I hope you are not in a position to care for someone you so dislike.

Don't worry, I am a financial counselor. I help people who can not afford insurance to find other means of paying. I also negotiate with insurance companies, I have no influence of patients care.

UmbertoXXII · #**124** Mar 28, '05, 10:44 am

There was a chance she could have relearned how to take food by mouth, the same way stroke victims relearn certain tasks. But the rehabilitation effort would have had to be ongoing, nonstop, which wasn't the case.

I asked this question before (of course, I was banned and expect to be banned again shortly), and no one seemed interested to pursue it, but has anyone considered that her attorneys were not on the ball, particularly early on? And what about insurance fraud? The monies were intended for her rehabilitation which ended abruptly, the attorneys pocketing most of the settlement.

No one wants to question the quality of her representation, but I think it should be addressed.

Mac6yver · #**125** Mar 28, '05, 10:44 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Anyone may lie. These nurses lost their jobs and testified under the penalty of perjury to these facts for no real gain to them. Pretty slim. Yet, you are willing to assume they are lying.

I am sorry, why is you believe these nurses who testified under the penalty of perjury, yet you do not believe those that testified under the same penalty of perjury? Is it because they are not supporting your side of the argument?

**fix** · #**126** Mar 28, '05, 10:45 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

I am not here to have a spiritual peeing contest with you. You have your beliefs I have mine.

The point is they are not all equal. The Terri case is a good example of this moral relativism, or even paganism, that our culture embraces.

Brad · #**127** Mar 28, '05, 10:45 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

Really? You were there, you saw this for yourself? Perhaps you fed her as well?

This is a senseless argument because neither were you there. The difference is that you are assuming death and I am assuming life. Which has worse consequences if you are wrong?

MariaG · #**128** Mar 28, '05, 10:46 am

As others have pointed out but apparently some are not listening, Terri is on a feeding tube because her guardian has denied her any physical therapy since 1991 for her to resume such functions. This is contrary to many health care professionals who believe she could be taught to swallow.

So we have the same person who denied her the rehabilitation to learn how to exist without a feeding tube deciding that the same tube he has made her dependent on, should be removed.

How on earth can anyone call this humane or right?

Brad · #**129** Mar 28, '05, 10:46 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

Don't worry, I am a financial counselor. I help people who can not afford insurance to find other means of paying. I also negotiate with insurance companies, I have no influence of patients care.

Excellent.

Mac6yver · #**130** Mar 28, '05, 10:47 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

This is a senseless argument because neither were you there. The difference is that you are assuming death and I am assuming life. Which has worse consequences if you are wrong?

I suppose that depends on what Terri's wishes were. If we go with my side and I am wrong then she is dead. If we go with your side and you are wrong then we have imprisoned her for life in her own body. Both sound like horrible situations. This is why we have drawn a line in the sand that states a spouse makes these decisions.

Brad · #**131** Mar 28, '05, 10:49 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

I am sorry, why is you believe these nurses who testified under the penalty of perjury, yet you do not believe those that testified under the same penalty of perjury? Is it because they are not supporting your side of the argument?

Hmmm. Nurses stand to gain..... nothing. Nurses stand to lose..... their job.

"others" stand to gain...... lots of money (many more right-to-die cases plus dollars from this one. stand to lose...... possible jail.

Think deeper.

Brad · #**132** Mar 28, '05, 10:51 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

I suppose that depends on what Terri's wishes were. If we go with my side and I am wrong then she is dead. If we go with your side and you are wrong then we have imprisoned her for life in her own body. Both sound like horrible situations. This is why we have drawn a line in the sand that states a spouse makes these decisions.

Being dead is worse than possibly recovering. Do you disagree with this?

Mac6yver · #**133** Mar 28, '05, 10:52 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Hmmm. Nurses stand to gain..... nothing. Nurses stand to lose..... their job.

"others" stand to gain...... lots of money (many more right-to-die cases plus dollars from this one. stand to lose...... possible jail.

Think deeper.

So you are saying that everone who testified in Michaels favor are in it for the money? THey are all in some vast conspiracy for financial gain? What about the experts you see on TV agreeing with the decision to remove the feeding tube, are they involved in this conspiracy? For that matter, why have I not received one dime of money, now I feel ripped off. After all, I must be part of this shadow conspiracy...

Mac6yver · #**134** Mar 28, '05, 10:55 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Being dead is worse than possibly recovering. Do you disagree with this?

The facts are that she will not recover, so the question is moot.

Brad · #**135** Mar 28, '05, 11:13 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac6yver

So you are saying that everone who testified in Michaels favor are in it for the money? THey are all in some vast conspiracy for financial gain? What about the experts you see on TV agreeing with the decision to remove the feeding tube, are they involved in this conspiracy? For that matter, why have I not received one dime of money, now I feel ripped off. After all, I must be part of this shadow conspiracy...

You need to stay with an argument logically rather than running off the deep-end. Let's backtrack.

The nurses testified that they fed her by mouth. Nobody on the other side denied this. You are saying they lied. What is your basis for saying this?