Author Topic: Fr. Cekada, Euthanasia and the Terri Schiavo Affair (Read 9219 times)

JohnChrysostom · « **Reply #20 on:** April 21, 2012, 08:29:20 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: JohnChrysostom
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: JohnChrysostom
Quote from: SJB
"Secular medical equiptment?"

What is modern medical equiptment used & relied upon FOR LIFE Itself, if not secular? Would you call it Godly?

Especially when the costs of that equiptment are Subsidized by the people, to sustain and preserve any life, artifically, by said machines. I will call it secular type machinery.

Why cant GODs will be done?

Why cant YOU and others, rather than insist on playing mad scientist, accept GODs will, and accept the wishes of someone who made it very clear to 3 loved ones, that she had NO desire to be kept alive by a machine(s)?

I would say medical equipment needs no distinction regarding secular and religious. You seem to be saying the equipment is contrary to good morals. I think the Church disagrees. Anyway, your infallible guide apears to be Fr. Cekada. I wonder if he knows such an ignoramous is on here "defending" him?

You failed to answer the question.

#4. WHY do you feel the need to betray those that have made it clear, their desire to Not have their lives sustained/preserved via artifical Machinery, after being in a coma, or a vegetative state?

We are talking about "jello and ice chips," food and hydration, not a ventilator. The fact is Mrs. Schiavo was dehydrated to death via court order and Fr. Cekada said it was morally permissible.

It is an undisputed fact that he scandalized and embarrassed many traditional Catholics. Nobody agrees with him, except you, and you are proving to everybody why they all thought Cekada was completely wrong in his typical shotgun style analysis.

Terri should NEVER have Been hooked up To any machines to begin with!!!
To be hooked on them, is morally Impermissable! Or do you take issue with that too?
If our lives must be sustained on machines, are we obligated to live on one, especially if we direct to others the need to not have done so.

You watch to many Sci Fi films..and wish to play mad scientist being kept alive at a horrific cost to the public, as a vegetable or close to one.

In reality, this is about YOU and Father Cekada (SPPX Seminary Graduate Priest), whom you know to be right.
But many made it a personal crusade against him, as they were devoid of facts, moral insight via saramental teachings and wisdom.

Fifth time for you.
#5. WHY do you feel the need to betray those that have made it clear, their desire to Not have their lives sustained/preserved via artifical Machinery, after being in a coma, or a vegetative state?
And
Who do you know wishes to have their own life preserved via artificial machines after being in a coma and effectively a vegetable, like Teri?

SJB · « **Reply #21 on:** April 21, 2012, 10:10:51 PM »

Quote from: JohnChrysostom

Quote from: SJB
Quote from: JohnChrysostom
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: JohnChrysostom
Quote from: SJB
"Secular medical equiptment?"

What is modern medical equiptment used & relied upon FOR LIFE Itself, if not secular? Would you call it Godly?

Especially when the costs of that equiptment are Subsidized by the people, to sustain and preserve any life, artifically, by said machines. I will call it secular type machinery.

Why cant GODs will be done?

Why cant YOU and others, rather than insist on playing mad scientist, accept GODs will, and accept the wishes of someone who made it very clear to 3 loved ones, that she had NO desire to be kept alive by a machine(s)?

I would say medical equipment needs no distinction regarding secular and religious. You seem to be saying the equipment is contrary to good morals. I think the Church disagrees. Anyway, your infallible guide apears to be Fr. Cekada. I wonder if he knows such an ignoramous is on here "defending" him?

You failed to answer the question.

#4. WHY do you feel the need to betray those that have made it clear, their desire to Not have their lives sustained/preserved via artifical Machinery, after being in a coma, or a vegetative state?

We are talking about "jello and ice chips," food and hydration, not a ventilator. The fact is Mrs. Schiavo was dehydrated to death via court order and Fr. Cekada said it was morally permissible.

It is an undisputed fact that he scandalized and embarrassed many traditional Catholics. Nobody agrees with him, except you, and you are proving to everybody why they all thought Cekada was completely wrong in his typical shotgun style analysis.

Terri should NEVER have Been hooked up To any machines to begin with!!!
To be hooked on them, is morally Impermissable! Or do you take issue with that too?
If our lives must be sustained on machines, are we obligated to live on one, especially if we direct to others the need to not have done so.

You watch to many Sci Fi films..and wish to play mad scientist being kept alive at a horrific cost to the public, as a vegetable or close to one.

In reality, this is about YOU and Father Cekada (SPPX Seminary Graduate Priest), whom you know to be right.
But many made it a personal crusade against him, as they were devoid of facts, moral insight via saramental teachings and wisdom.

Fifth time for you.
#5. WHY do you feel the need to betray those that have made it clear, their desire to Not have their lives sustained/preserved via artifical Machinery, after being in a coma, or a vegetative state?
And
Who do you know wishes to have their own life preserved via artificial machines after being in a coma and effectively a vegetable, like Teri?

You are making my point even stronger. Carry on, John.

Marcelino · « **Reply #22 on:** April 22, 2012, 12:16:53 AM »

She's a symbol. Like an unborn child, dependent on her mother's nourishment. Regardless of the "technicalities" and "legalities" it should be obvious that her case is more symbolic, than anything else. It's like arguing that John Wayne wasn't the greatest cowboy star, at his fan club's annual meeting: no one cares, he's the duke, that's it, end of story.

The "facts" don't matter. If you say Terri Schiavo's life support should have been "aborted," then you might as well say, every abortion since Roe V. Wade was a truimph of justice. You're guaranteed to get the same reaction --> :really-mad2:

i wouldn't do it

Raoul76 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 22, 2012, 05:32:24 PM »

There may be an argument to be made that permanent life support was extraordinary means, and thus not necessary. I don't know.

However, her parents wanted to have the tubes removed, take her home and feed her by hand.

http://www.inclusiondaily.com/archives/05/03/08/030805flschiavo.htm

Quote

"On Monday, Greer rejected requests by Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, that she be allowed to die at home with them rather than at a hospice, and that the media be allowed to view Terri interacting with them. Their attorneys also requested that they be allowed to feed Terri by hand if her feeding tube is taken out as scheduled."

Therefore, extraordinary means were not necessary to keep her alive.

I'm interested in any rebuttal, if one can be provided. But that is how the situation strikes me. Father Cekada's argument about the burden on the taxpayer also was poorly chosen, it just sounds heartless, even if there were truth to it; which there isn't, if Terri Schiavo could have been kept alive just by hand-feeding.

JohnChrysostom · « **Reply #24 on:** April 22, 2012, 06:03:44 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

There may be an argument to be made that permanent life support was extraordinary means, and thus not necessary. I don't know.

However, her parents wanted to have the tubes removed, take her home and feed her by hand.

http://www.inclusiondaily.com/archives/05/03/08/030805flschiavo.htm

Quote
"On Monday, Greer rejected requests by Terri's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, that she be allowed to die at home with them rather than at a hospice, and that the media be allowed to view Terri interacting with them. Their attorneys also requested that they be allowed to feed Terri by hand if her feeding tube is taken out as scheduled."

Therefore, extraordinary means were not necessary to keep her alive.

I'm interested in any rebuttal, if one can be provided. But that is how the situation strikes me. Father Cekada's argument about the burden on the taxpayer also was poorly chosen, it just sounds heartless, even if there were truth to it; which there isn't, if Terri Schiavo could have been kept alive just by hand-feeding.

Terri Schiavo stayed at a care facility the cost of which was $80K per year.
Taxpayers were socked with $750K, via Medicaid-drugs, care, etc
Ultimately a malpractice suit (Another taxpayer subsidy resulting in raising all of our rates) paid for her care.

Machinery is Extraordinary care. Period.

I have no problem with her parents caring for her, but again, for the 6th time, Terri Told 3 Family members her Directive and Wish To NOT be assisted for life on any machinery.

So now the issue is can parents usurp a spouses role in legal matters?

You peolple kill me. Big on emotion, small on logic and religious teaching/perspective.
And Killing of Brown people in the millions is OK with you too.
As long as you dont have to see photos of any of it where they are not fully clothed.