Calling out Terri Schiavo

Originally posted by Halitose
IIRC she was in a coma, not brain dead. Btw, I agree with the definition of death being the irreversible cessation of brain activity.

So, one functioning neuron is sufficient for being alive? That's dumb.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Your recollection is incorrect. She was in a prolonged 'persistant
vegetative state.' As a result of her seizure, blood going to certain
parts of the brain -- in this case, the vast majority of the cerebrum --
was cut off. Over the many years without blood, the brain tissue
atrophied and, subsequently, disappeared. In its place was basically
fluid ...[text shortened]... brain that made her 'Terri' was
deceased.

Does this clear it up for you?

Nemesio

Such a clear distinction would be quite convenient. I think medically the line is much more blurred than it seems from your post.

Originally posted by bbarr
So, one functioning neuron is sufficient for being alive? That's dumb.

Would one functioning neuron be alive for more than a couple minutes without another couple million that control respiration/digestion etc?

Originally posted by Halitose
Such a clear distinction would be quite convenient. I think medically the line is much more blurred than it seems from your post.

There is no subjectivity to the material in my post, thus no blurring to be made in
Terri Schiavo's case.

She did in fact have a stroke which resulted in the permanent cutting off of blood
to her cerebrum. Her cerebrum did in fact atrophy and subsequently disappear.
Those elements which make her a substantive person -- the capacity for consciousness,
personality, experience, memory, and so forth -- were literally not present and,
since brain tissue does not regenerate, had no chance of ever becoming present in
the future. All that was present were the functions which control her autonomic
responses -- like breathing or heart palpitations -- and reflex reaction to stimuli.

These facts are not in any medical dispute.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
There is no subjectivity to the material in my post, thus no blurring to be made in
Terri Schiavo's case.

She did in fact have a stroke which resulted in the permanent cutting off of blood
to her cerebrum. Her cerebrum did in fact atrophy and subsequently disappear.
Those elements which make her a substantive person -- the capacity for consciousness, ...[text shortened]... ns -- and reflex reaction to stimuli.

These facts are not in any medical dispute.

Nemesio

Those elements which make her a substantive person -- the capacity for consciousness,
personality, experience, memory, and so forth -- were literally not present and...

Walk in the subjectivity. It's when another decides for you that your life is not worth living.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]Those elements which make her a substantive person -- the capacity for consciousness,
personality, experience, memory, and so forth -- were literally not present and...

Walk in the subjectivity. It's when another decides for you that your life is not worth living.[/b]

She decided for herself that she would not have wanted to live in such a state and made statements to that effect. There is no "subjectivity" involved except her own. Polls in the US indicate that about 90% of Americans would make the same decision for themselves.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
The Bible claims that the sun once stood still above Jericho. Is the Bible wrong on this point?

Even without QM or HUP I would think the Bible was not being historically accurate on that point.

You're not talking to dj2, remember?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Even without QM or HUP I would think the Bible was not being historically accurate on that point.

Which parts of the Bible does the RCC hold to be fictional?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Which parts of the Bible does the RCC hold to be fictional?

Very little, actually. AFAIK, the Genesis creation account is the only section where the Church explicitly teaches that the language is figurative.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Very little, actually. AFAIK, the Genesis creation account is the only section where the Church explicitly teaches that the language is figurative.

So the Church holds that the Jericho account is historical, and you disagree about that?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
So the Church holds that the Jericho account is historical, and you disagree about that?

I don't think that the Church HOLDS that the Jericho account is historical OR fictional. I don't believe either belief is required dogma.

EDIT: When I went to Catholic school long ago it was taught as if it really happened though I think they glossed over the slaughtering of children and donkeys part.

Originally posted by Halitose
Walk in the subjectivity. It's when another decides for you that your life is not worth living.

First: Do you acknowledge that the personality of 'Terri' was irrevocably destroyed given
the absence of the majority of her cerebrum (the parts known to be the sites of personality)?
Do you acknowledge that her capacity for consciousness was irrevocably destroyed?

If you don't, then you dispute the scientific facts of the case.

Second: What is it about brain death that you deem sufficient cause for removing life
support that lacking a cerebrum lacks? That is, which capacities are enough to merit being
preserved?

Third: Do you deny that a person's spouse should be the executor of their wishes in the case
of medical trauma such as this?

Nemesio

Originally posted by no1marauder

I don't think that the Church HOLDS that the Jericho account is historical OR fictional. I don't believe either belief is required dogma.

When I went to Catholic school long ago it was taught as if it really happened though I think they glossed over the slaughtering of children and donkeys part.

Sounds like another case of Simon Says. They teach it's true without "officially" teaching that it's true. Shameful that they'd run such a play on children.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]Those elements which make her a substantive person -- the capacity for consciousness,
personality, experience, memory, and so forth -- were literally not present and...

Walk in the subjectivity. It's when another decides for you that your life is not worth living.[/b]

There was no 'you' there, in Schiavo's case. She had no mental life.

Originally posted by bbarr
There was no 'you' there, in Schiavo's case. She had no mental life.

Does this really matter in the context of the actual euthanasia practice ?