So you're saying grabbing the spotlight for a little cheap publicity is the best way to go about this thing?Yorzhik said:Zak wrote:
Because Terri is being murdered, and nothing so far has stopped her murder. Obviously, the attention Terri is getting isn't the right kind, so how do we change the attention that Terri is getting without bring attention to ourselves? If it could be done, we would do it. But it cannot, so it is good that someone was able to.
I am not so egotistical that I believe that bringing any attention to myself would change that situation. :nono:Wouldn't you bring attention to yourself to stop Terri's murder?
Maybe headbanging against a Granite wall has done something to my head... :bang: Whatever.granite1010 said:Dread, that's crap and you know it.
It sounds like some old forged papers Dan Rather would report on written by a mysterious commie :Commie: named "Flipper".....P.S. Is it just me or does the "Enyart Criterion" sound like the name of a bad supermarket novel?
Did you just make this up or what?Flipper said:Yeah, this whole mess could have just been avoided using the Enyart Criterion by not interfering with the natural processes of death when she was arresting on her kitchen floor.
Bob Enyart said:Of course we can’t always determine immediately the extent of damage, and if we don’t revive someone who can perhaps fully recover over time, then the default position is that they should die because of an unhealthy bias against revival. From what you’ve written, I think that you and I agree that it is wrong to kill someone, but not wrong to let a dying man die. However, I’d like to try to pull you further to the side of erring on the side of life even in those precious moments when life-saving actions must be taken.
Yeah, it does sound like badly contrived fiction.granite1010 said:Dread, that's crap and you know it.
P.S. Is it just me or does the "Enyart Criterion" sound like the name of a bad supermarket novel?
If it could be done without bringing attention to yourself, as we would also do if possible, wouldn't you do it to stop Terri's murder?I am not so egotistical that I believe that bringing any attention to myself would change that situation.
Get a clue. Just admit that you are trying to fit in with the likes of Granite, Zakath, and avatar382. You obviously couldn't care less about Terri, and side with the muderers. :doh:Thia said:Typical addictive behaviour on the part of the obnoxious protestors - "It's all about me! I have faith but no reason! Come on down and join the Band of Bobbies!"
A Ludlum novel to be precise...Turbo said:Yeah, it does sound like badly contrived fiction.
Perhaps that is what Flipper is referring to; or perhaps not. When he comes back, we'll find out.I think that you and I agree that it is wrong to kill someone, but not wrong to let a dying man die.
Nice of you to take that sentence out of context on Flipper's behalf.Zakath said:Perhaps that is what Flipper is referring to; or perhaps not. When he comes back, we'll find out.
I'm quite content to let my favorite cetacean type for himself... :thumb:Turbo said:Nice of you to take that sentence out of context on Flipper's behalf.
Dread Helm said:Get a clue. Just admit that you are trying to fit in with the likes of Granite, Zakath, and avatar382. You obviously couldn't care less about Terri, and side with the muderers. :doh:
Did you hear about the latest media hound to show up to get their bit of spotlight?granite1010 said:I side with her parents, not these publicity-hungry freaks getting arrested for ten minutes of airtime.
Short answer: I'm not sure. :think:Turbo said:Flipper stated that Enyart would support withholding treatment from someone who was "arresting on her kitchen floor."
Zakath, based on the quotes in post #84, do you agree that Flipper mischaracterized Enyart's beliefs (whether intentionally or not)?
So even after reading this:Zakath said:Short answer: I'm not sure. :think:
The context of your quote is insufficient for me to ascertain a possible fuller meaning of what Enyart does or does not believe...
...and this:Bob Enyart said:Of course we can’t always determine immediately the extent of damage, and if we don’t revive someone who can perhaps fully recover over time, then the default position is that they should die because of an unhealthy bias against revival.
...you just can't figure it out. OK. Thanks for clarifying.However, I’d like to try to pull you further to the side of erring on the side of life even in those precious moments when life-saving actions must be taken.
You're welcome. :thumb:Turbo said:So even after reading this:...and this:...you just can't figure it out. OK. Thanks for clarifying.
Dread Helm said:Get a clue. Just admit that you are trying to fit in with the likes of Granite, Zakath, and avatar382. You obviously couldn't care less about Terri, and side with the muderers. :doh:
Riiiiight. That's me alright. :dunce: I'm a kook because I believe that murder is wrong and that Terri should live. :hammer:Thia said:...and you are an arrogant kook.