| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
28 Mar 2005 01:23:40 PM |
| Object: |
how do you spell hypocricy |
t-o-m d-e-l-a-y
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/28/politics/28delay.html
.
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 06:27:48 PM |
|
|
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a person to
be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas law in
fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed from life support if
there is no hope of recovery.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 08:04:54 PM |
|
|
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:M-ydnXsMwfXkPdXfRVn-sA@giganews.com:
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a person to
be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas law
in fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed from life
support if there is no hope of recovery.
It's a little more complex than that. The patient must be terminal,
which Terri Schiavo is not. The attending physician must make that
judgement with the concurrance of a medical ethics committee.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 10:22:48 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112061894.1f56a07adc99e1de3be9dcdb449b5741@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:M-ydnXsMwfXkPdXfRVn-sA@giganews.com:
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a person to
be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas law
in fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed from life
support if there is no hope of recovery.
It's a little more complex than that. The patient must be terminal,
which Terri Schiavo is not.
How is she not terminal?
The attending physician must make that
judgement with the concurrance of a medical ethics committee.
Right. And then what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
29 Mar 2005 07:44:02 AM |
|
|
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:d8CdnaJllLIRStXfRVn-rg@giganews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112061894.1f56a07adc99e1de3be9dcdb449b5741@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:M-ydnXsMwfXkPdXfRVn-sA@giganews.com:
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a person
to be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas
law in fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed from
life support if there is no hope of recovery.
It's a little more complex than that. The patient must be terminal,
which Terri Schiavo is not.
How is she not terminal?
Apparantly the medical definition of "terminal" does not include
"requires assistance with feeding and hydration".
The attending physician must make that
judgement with the concurrance of a medical ethics committee.
Right. And then what?
And then if Medicaid or Medicare will pay for another hospital, they
must be moved instead of taken off of life support.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Stahl" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
29 Mar 2005 06:26:56 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112103843.2d289e46729d0f4711b0a54e0e383492@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:d8CdnaJllLIRStXfRVn-rg@giganews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112061894.1f56a07adc99e1de3be9dcdb449b5741@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:M-ydnXsMwfXkPdXfRVn-sA@giganews.com:
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a person
to be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas
law in fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed from
life support if there is no hope of recovery.
It's a little more complex than that. The patient must be terminal,
which Terri Schiavo is not.
How is she not terminal?
Apparantly the medical definition of "terminal" does not include
"requires assistance with feeding and hydration".
But it does include "no cerebral cortex".
The attending physician must make that
judgement with the concurrance of a medical ethics committee.
Right. And then what?
And then if Medicaid or Medicare will pay for another hospital, they
must be moved instead of taken off of life support.
What determines whether Medicare/Medicaid will pay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
29 Mar 2005 10:29:22 PM |
|
|
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:6aSdnQ-m4K5ZbNTfRVn-3Q@giganews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112103843.2d289e46729d0f4711b0a54e0e383492@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:d8CdnaJllLIRStXfRVn-rg@giganews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1112061894.1f56a07adc99e1de3be9dcdb449b5741@teranews...
"Mark Stahl" <stahl@nospam.aecom.yu.edu> wrote in
news:M-ydnXsMwfXkPdXfRVn-sA@giganews.com:
"Sean C" <redhawk@burnspammersalive.com> wrote in message
news:280320051700473984%redhawk@burnspammersalive.com...
-snip-
There may be
legal differences, as some states like Texas do not allow a
person to be taken off a respirator once they are on it,
Really? I thought this was definitely not the case, and that Texas
law in fact requires a Medicare/Medicaid patient to be removed
from life support if there is no hope of recovery.
It's a little more complex than that. The patient must be terminal,
which Terri Schiavo is not.
How is she not terminal?
Apparantly the medical definition of "terminal" does not include
"requires assistance with feeding and hydration".
But it does include "no cerebral cortex".
Doesn't being "terminal" for the last fifteen years sort of make a joke
out of the definition of the word?
The attending physician must make that
judgement with the concurrance of a medical ethics committee.
Right. And then what?
And then if Medicaid or Medicare will pay for another hospital, they
must be moved instead of taken off of life support.
What determines whether Medicare/Medicaid will pay?
Federal law?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nivlem" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 03:45:41 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:07:53 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Nivlem <mlml@svn.net> wrote in news:9rpg41hcmirp1s72cn1607i3j571gpq6fq@
4ax.com:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:09:54 GMT, Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
syvanen@ucdavis.edu wrote in news:1112037820.906635.95450
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
t-o-m d-e-l-a-y
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/28/politics/28delay.html
So, let me get this straight. In order to avoid hypocrisy, any time
somebody makes one decision in one case they must make an identical
decision in every subsequent case, no matter what the circumstances?
Well, yeah, if the important circumstances are similar.
Which they are. 2 people who were simply toast, with no hope
of recovery.
I'm not trying to defend his decision, I just want to be sure I've got
"hypocrisy" right here. Seems that the previous case was one where the
victim was going to die regardless.
vs. one where the patient is, in fact already dead in any
meaningful sense. Neither has any hope. The feeding tube is
artificial sustenance, just as much as a heart-lung machine
for someone who can't breathe for themselves would be. We're
all going to die, regardless. They could have kept him on a
bit longer as a vegetable by plugging him into dialysis and
so forth. They opted not to. Utter fucking hypocrisy, then.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 04:21:01 PM |
|
|
Not that way.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert the NOLA Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: how do you spell hypocricy |
28 Mar 2005 02:54:53 PM |
|
|
I am sure these right-wing zealots are in it just because they care
about Terri... and I also expect pigs to fly soon.
An excerpt from this week's TIME:
Some on the religious right think the Schiavo case shows that their
agenda is more realistic than ever. "When I heard that Senate minority
leader Harry Reid was with us, I thought I had died and gone to
heaven," says the Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional
Values Coalition. "[This] says that being pro-life is respectable and
has political credibility. The issue is broadening; it isn't just
abortion."
If people like Sheldon get their way, it will be about almost
everything that encompasses the so-called culture-of-life movement,
including restricting stem-cell research and assisted suicide. Social
conservatives are almost certain to use the Schiavo case as another
weapon in the coming war against what they castigate as judicial
activism, the practice of creating new rights from the bench. As Frist
contemplates the so-called nuclear option of trying to take away
congressional Democrats' ability to filibuster President Bush's
controversial judicial nominees, Schiavo is sure to be a rallying cry.
In particular, critics fervently believe that the federal courts that
heard the Schindlers' appeals largely ignored Congress's will by not
following the bill's order to conduct a thorough re-examination of the
case, formally called a de novo review. "In this instance, judges have
essentially made themselves the supreme political power and simply
aren't willing to listen to other branches of government," says Don
Feder, communications director of Vision America, a Texas-based
Christian conservative group.
On 28 Mar 2005 11:23:40 -0800, wrote:
t-o-m d-e-l-a-y
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/28/politics/28delay.html
"[The Bill of Rights is] designed to protect individuals and minorities against the tyranny of the majority, but it's also designed to protect the people against bureaucracy, against the government." -- Judge Lawrence Tribe
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
