A good death for the Pope? - I'm confused by Geezer

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

A good death for the Pope? - I'm confused

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 6, 2005 16:06
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3969
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, April 1, 2005 2:04 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

It appears that many of the same folks who wanted to use any means necessary to keep Terri Schiavo alive are now praying that the Pope be allowed to die with dignity. I can't help but see sort of a disconnect here. Why aren't they demanding that he be kept alive by any means necessary? Has anyone filed a lawsuit requesting extraordinary measures yet? Checked to see if he has a "living will"? No. They're just writing him off. Letting him go.

I really mean no disrespect to the Pope. To my non-religious view he's generally been a force for good (although I have problems with his, and his Church's, stand on birth control). I just wonder at the apparent double standard.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 3:23 PM

CONSCIENCE

Geezer, you out of your mind. Nobody's removed the Pope's feeding tube. Nobody's starving him to death.

Feeding someone is not extraordinary means to save a person's life.

If the Holy Father's heart stops, then THAT is a natural death. If he's starved, then that's murder.

By the way, the Pope will be in heaven with the Lord, while someday that murdering murderer Michael Schiavo will burn a deep level of hell.

Michael "Hitler" Schiavo

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 3:59 PM

SGTGUMP

I guess a lack of action, say not feeding someone, would be murder? Then what about the lack of action by the Vatican by not taking the Pope to the hospital this time? I'm sure there are very good doctors that could prolong his life by a couple of days at least, but in order for that to happen they need to be there. And no, the irony is not totally lost on everyone, Geezer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 5:01 PM

IMEARLY

Quote:
It appears that many of the same folks who wanted to use any means necessary to keep Terri Schiavo alive are now praying that the Pope be allowed to die with dignity. I can't help but see sort of a disconnect here. Why aren't they demanding that he be kept alive by any means necessary? Has anyone filed a lawsuit requesting extraordinary measures yet? Checked to see if he has a "living will"? No. They're just writing him off. Letting him go.

I really mean no disrespect to the Pope. To my non-religious view he's generally been a force for good (although I have problems with his, and his Church's, stand on birth control). I just wonder at the apparent double standard.

The Catholic Church’s official position is that life should not be extended through extraordinary means. That which is extraordinary however is somewhat fuzzy as technology is continuously improved. I can see why there is confusion within the church.

If Terri’s family were to follow Catholic doctrine, then they would have let her go many years ago. Religion was a major factor in their argument. If you don’t follow one of god’s rules, it is the same as forsaking them all. Their argument is moot.

Quote:

Geezer, you out of your mind. Nobody's removed the Pope's feeding tube. Nobody's starving him to death.

Feeding someone is not extraordinary means to save a person's life.

If the Holy Father's heart stops, then THAT is a natural death. If he's starved, then that's murder.

By the way, the Pope will be in heaven with the Lord, while someday that murdering murderer Michael Schiavo will burn a deep level of hell.

The Pope is not in a persistent vegetative state. If Terri Schiavo were able to communicate in any way, beyond reflex then she would still be alive. The Pontiff is capable of communication.

Since you pull the god card, let me help you.
If you believe the Pontiff will go to heaven then why do you believe that Michael Schiavo will go to hell, he followed Catholic Doctrine. Your feelings aside, this is the written will of god.

Quote:

I guess a lack of action, say not feeding someone, would be murder? Then what about the lack of action by the Vatican by not taking the Pope to the hospital this time? I'm sure there are very good doctors that could prolong his life by a couple of days at least, but in order for that to happen they need to be there. And no, the irony is not totally lost on everyone, Geezer.

There are two possible reasons why John Paul has not been moved, either he is too ill to be moved, or he is well enough that it is not warranted, in either case the Pontiff will have the assistance he needs at home.

Regardless, I doubt that the Pontiff will allow himself to escape the graces of god, by clinging to the mortal coil.

Go sign my Guest Book,
http://www.geocities.com/thisbrownhouse
Then download Serenity,
http://homepage.mac.com/rocketplane/FileSharing8.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 6:16 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

After saying this, If I was in the same state Terri Schiavo was in. I would want to go. My wife, inlaws, grandparents, have all expressed the same opinion.

The problem I have with the situation is why remove the feeding tube and starve her to death over days and weeks ?

If in the same, I would want the overdose of morphine or something similar. We put down our dogs and cats if they are in incurable pain, and I like them alot more than many people I have met.

Crazy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 7:07 PM

DEUTSCHMANNECROS

As a devout catholic I pray for the pope. Concerning shaivo, it should be the person's descion to "PUll the plug", if they're unable to decide, then realize that one shouldn't be unplugged against one's will. I'm erratic on this. the pope realize his body was frail,and that prolonging his death, he might be in a coma and incapicitate the church, so to die a natural death not by being kept alive by machine and having the plug pulled, he decides no way. as for terry, I believe if she could not decide whether to live or die, she should be kept alive, until she dies a natural death, not by starvation or unplugging her. But in the future we must realize to be kept alive by a machine, isn't living and we also should have do not resessitates should we fall into a situation like terry's. I'm very pro-life,however a machine making one live, past GOD's plan for a natural death for a person isn't right or ethical and almost sinnfull. in the end protect, cherish and preserve life to the last. if there's hope for life don't unplug them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 9:51 PM

CONSCIENCE

Quote:
Originally posted by sgtgump:
I guess a lack of action, say not feeding someone, would be murder? Then what about the lack of action by the Vatican by not taking the Pope to the hospital this time? I'm sure there are very good doctors that could prolong his life by a couple of days at least, but in order for that to happen they need to be there.

OMG, another crazy person. That have not taken him to the hospital because he specifically told them not to when he was still conscious.

He has doctors with him at his apartment, they've practically turned his home into his own private hospital.

Get the facts first before you post, pal.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 1, 2005 10:03 PM

WALKERHOUND

Your right the fuzzy bit is what constitutes “extraordinary measures”. In the case of terry sc(I can’t spell the name sorry), what was keeping her alive was a feeding tube. She couldn’t feed her self, the Holy Father received a similar tube put in a few days ago because of complications from parkinses dieses (apparently it frequently causes problems with swallowing). Now this was the only life support that terry(or is it tarry) was on. Speaking just from catholic doctrine (though I don’t think it is really the type of thing that many people will consider really out there) providing food and water to somebody that is ill is considered a common duty. It’s right up there with providing bask needs. So the question is do you conseder giving somebody food and water (albeit using a tube traded into there stomach) to be “extraordinary measures” or in any other way above and beyond the call of duty. The reason terry died was because she was not given any food or water, and one thing I can say with certainty about any body you care to name is that if you deprive them of food and water they will die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 2, 2005 8:45 AM

DARKJESTER

Conscience wrote:

Quote:
Geezer, you out of your mind. Nobody's removed the Pope's feeding tube. Nobody's starving him to death.

Feeding someone is not extraordinary means to save a person's life.

If the Holy Father's heart stops, then THAT is a natural death. If he's starved, then that's murder.

By the way, the Pope will be in heaven with the Lord, while someday that murdering murderer Michael Schiavo will burn a deep level of hell.

Conscience also wrote:

Quote:
OMG, another crazy person. That have not taken him to the hospital because he specifically told them not to when he was still conscious.

He has doctors with him at his apartment, they've practically turned his home into his own private hospital.

Get the facts first before you post, pal.

Sorry Conscience, your disagreeing with him doesn't mean he is crazy, and doesn't warrant name-calling or implications of stupidity. You may raise some valid points, but could we raise the civility bar here, please?

Edited to add: And yes Geezer, it is ironic that many people who are "pro-life" also favor the death penalty, and that the current President who came down on the side of life in the Terry Schiavo case signed a bill while Governor that allows doctors to over-rule family members and disconnect life-support for certain patients in Texas hospitals. Irony is alive and well in America.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 2, 2005 9:48 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I don’t know what people in general are saying about the Pope. I know what they are saying at my church, and no one has written him off just yet. I think there is a fear that the Pope’s condition may persist this way for quite a while during which the Vatican would be lacking a spiritual leader. Some are saying that he should step down, but no one whom I’ve talked to has expressed any desire to see him die.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 2, 2005 9:57 AM

WALKERHOUND

“your disagreeing with him doesn't mean he is crazy”
“but could we raise the civility bar here, please”

darkjester, I applaud the attempt but your probably swimming up stream here.

Note I’m not singling out any body particularly that has posted on this thread so far. Just the general trend in this part of the board

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 2, 2005 8:10 PM

DANFAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Conscience:
Feeding someone is not extraordinary means to save a person's life.

I'll step out on a limb here and offer some thoughts I've been turning over in my head since the Terry Schiavo situation overpowered the news...

I've seen a lot of debate here and elsewhere over the intrinsic difference between removing "artificial life support" and removing a feeding tube. I'm not sure I see the difference that is so obvious to others.

Handing someone a ham sandwich and a glass of water is certainly not “extraordinary means” for preserving life. But puncturing abdominal tissues and running a tube directly into the stomach of someone without the remaining brain function to even swallow? Sounds pretty extraordinary to me. Much like electrically stimulating the heart or pumping air into and out of lungs that no longer receive the signals needed to operate on their own. In fact, artificial respiration may be nearly exactly like artificial nutrition… pumping a substance (food/air) into an organ (stomach/lung) still capable of processing the substance, but trapped in a body incapable of delivering the substance to the organ.

The prevailing complaint I’ve seen with removing feeding tubes is that "It's inhuman to starve someone to death!" Better to stop their hearts? Better to suffocate them? If the body can't do it for itself, then doing it for the body is providing artificial life support.

As near as I can tell, there are two significant differences:

1) Heart beat and breathing are autonomic functions. Swallowing seems like a more complex activity, requiring higher brain functions, perhaps up to a low level of consciousness to perform.

2) Stopping someone’s heart kills in moments. Stopping someone’s breathing kills in minutes. Stopping someone’s nutrition kills in days or weeks.

Is it the time involved that makes stopping nutrition monstrous? If the higher level applications (mind, personality, memory) have terminated, and only the firmware (basic metabolic functions) is still running, then who is home to tell whether its moments or days?

That said, I too feel a little squeamish about all the pain signals that are surely generated in the days/weeks that someone in a PVS starves to death, even if we think no one’s home. If that person had clearly stated a desire not to be kept alive artificially, and their heart/lungs were still operating, I’d lean towards a morphine OD. And yes, I feel squeamish about that as well.

I am open to arguments that differentiate between artificial feeding and artificial heartbeat/respiration. My own thoughts haven’t led to a compelling difference for me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 3, 2005 1:06 PM

STARRBABY

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
After saying this, If I was in the same state Terri Schiavo was in. I would want to go. My wife, inlaws, grandparents, have all expressed the same opinion.

The problem I have with the situation is why remove the feeding tube and starve her to death over days and weeks ?

If in the same, I would want the overdose of morphine or something similar. We put down our dogs and cats if they are in incurable pain, and I like them alot more than many people I have met.

Crazy

I agree w/ you completely. We put down our animals and even our convicted felons in a humane and swift manner. However, slow starvation is acceptable for an innocent woman?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 12:46 AM

PIRATEJENNY

Quote:
By the way, the Pope will be in heaven with the Lord, while someday that murdering murderer Michael Schiavo will burn a deep level of hell.

OH Gawd the humanity!!!

you can tell I'm not religious!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 12:54 AM

PIRATEJENNY

Quote:
If that person had clearly stated a desire not to be kept alive artificially, and their heart/lungs were still operating, I’d lean towards a morphine OD. And yes, I feel squeamish about that as well.

ok maybe I'm going a little off topic, why is everyone so scared of death..we are all going to die its just a fact..its how it is, this woman's quality of life should be the overriding factor..and she wasnt living at all , she was just exsisting..not living I think everyone can agree on that point.....the larger issue here that hasn't been addressed is peoples abilty to cope with the fact that...death comes to us all. Its unhealthy the way we don't respect death

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 6:29 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by piratejenny:
...its how it is, this woman's quality of life should be the overriding factor..and she wasnt living at all , she was just exsisting..not living I think everyone can agree on that point...

That's the problem. Not everyone agreed on that point. The parents claimed that she was more then just existing. They claimed she had limited function and that more could be recovered through therapy. The husband disagreed and the treating physicians were split. There was so much bull flying around from both sides, the court should have held an evidentiary hearing to sort it out.

Coulda been done that Monday after Congress acted. Quick hearing. One day. Order a PET and CAT scan, get results and another hearing on Tuesday. Decision Tuesday night...all without reinserting the tube, unless the test came back positive.

Quote:

Its unhealthy the way we don't respect death

More unhealthy to not respect life.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:21 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Everybody dies, and of what I've seen, for the most part, death is not pretty, dignified, or comfortable.
There is an article in the NYTimes today about what is coma, persistant vegetative state, and minimally conscious, expected recovery times, types of brain damage associated with each etc. The conclusion is that Mrs Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery.
But I know Bush is an intellectual and a neurologist, and has studied this deeply. Not only that, he believes in life so much he abhors war and the death penalty, and funds medical care for all. And he is so wise and all-knowing, he can decide these matters for individual families. So I guess we should just listen to him.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 9:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Hero- The court DID wade through the evidence, including the doctor's evaluations. Among other things, it found Hammesfahr (one of the doctors who said Terri could improve) to be a fraud. (He operates a cash in advance clinic, and despite the fact that he claims "hundreds" of success stories he has not published a study- or even a case history- in a peer reviewed journal.)

We tend to treat our animals better than people. When my cat's megacolon got to the point where he could no longer be treated and he was getting thin, I took him to the vets. They gave him a tranquilizer and he fell asleep, purring, under my hands. Then they stopped his heart. That was the best death I ever saw.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 5, 2005 8:19 PM

PIRATEJENNY

Quote:
They gave him a tranquilizer and he fell asleep, purring, under my hands. Then they stopped his heart. That was the best death I ever saw.

now if we could all be so lucky, if I'm ever terminally ill or very old and on my last legs, I would love to be able to just have an overdose of morphine and go quietly in my sleep

instead of focusing so much on existing and life..we should focus on quality of life..and giving people the option of the most humane and peaceful and painless death as possible!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 10:54 AM

XENOCIDE

Quote:
Originally posted by DarkJester:
Conscience wrote:
Quote:
Geezer, you out of your mind. Nobody's removed the Pope's feeding tube. Nobody's starving him to death.

Feeding someone is not extraordinary means to save a person's life.

If the Holy Father's heart stops, then THAT is a natural death. If he's starved, then that's murder.

By the way, the Pope will be in heaven with the Lord, while someday that murdering murderer Michael Schiavo will burn a deep level of hell.

Conscience also wrote:

Quote:
OMG, another crazy person. That have not taken him to the hospital because he specifically told them not to when he was still conscious.

He has doctors with him at his apartment, they've practically turned his home into his own private hospital.

Get the facts first before you post, pal.

Sorry Conscience, your disagreeing with him doesn't mean he is crazy, and doesn't warrant name-calling or implications of stupidity. You may raise some valid points, but could we raise the civility bar here, please?

Edited to add: And yes Geezer, it is ironic that many people who are "pro-life" also favor the death penalty, and that the current President who came down on the side of life in the Terry Schiavo case signed a bill while Governor that allows doctors to over-rule family members and disconnect life-support for certain patients in Texas hospitals. Irony is alive and well in America.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

DJ,

Just ignore Conscience. She only comes to call names and do some flamebaiting. She bails once conversation starts.

-Eli

If voting mattered, they'd make it illegal.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 6, 2005 4:06 PM

WALKERHOUND

What’s to respect about death, it is a state of being that will come to all living things. But if we are to “embrace death” then it would indeed be only logical to look at existence(for what else is life) in terms of quality (what can you do, how often have you done it, and what have you done) then we are setting a arbitrary price on life.

If somebody was to go to a hospital during a time when it is vary busy thy would have to be triaged, were a doctor would have to assuse there injuries and put a priority on each patient. So would have to weight on more pressing injures before thy could be treated.
But maybe it would be better for every body at all times to be triaged based on what type of life there injuries would leve them. Would it be better for somebody that has lost a limb or has received damages to one of the sense (and as such there quality of life has been adversely affected ) to be offered palliative care (I’E euthanasia) instead of unisarly prolonging there suffering (and wasting perfectly useable resources on there continued existence as well ), and off course if any body was to recive brain damge past a cretin threshold thy could be immediate put out of there misery (much like we would with a dog) as thy could no longer live a worth while life.

Or we could have a system were the cognitively challenged were reviewed by a team of highly trained doctors to decided if thy are worth of the expediter of resources on there care and the protections of basic civil and judicial rights. Possibly one doctor could examine the patient and there medical records and use this info to fill out a standardized form which would then be examined by two other independent doctors (none of the three would no of each other it would be completely blind). If those two concur in finding somebody incompetent to continue living then the stat could arrange to have them humanly put to sleep.(the best part is this system has been used before so all the bugs should be manly worked out of it)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE