I read the comment about being ‘left in a jar’. How tacky. In fact, I found that entire comment tacky.

Moi… I agree with you on everything you’ve said. You have stated it beautifully.

02. I’m donating my body to LSU Medical School so the young med students have a real cadaver to learn on. When they are done they will cremate me and send my remains to my family. My family will scatter my ashes in Carmel, CA. I don’t want my remains left in a jar, in a crypt, on a shelf, in the dark … Ashes to ashes and dust to dust — I’d rather become one with the sea and the shore — what could be more natural?

03. I am going to scatter my mother’s ashes in the coming weeks in California. No, there will be no place to visit her. However, although some people think it odd and morbid, I have a bit of her remains inside of a locket that I never, ever take off. In my home I have a sort of casual altar. I have my parent’s pictures there, my grandmother’s pic and Mr. Man’s parents pics. I keep a candle lit and usually have fresh flowers there as well. I don’t need a place to go visit them — they live in my home and in my heart.

04. Before I signed any papers I told Mr. Man what my wishes were. I believe Terri did the same and I don’t believe her parents or the government should be involved in any decisions. The goverment is fighting to save Terri but they are allowing hundreds of thousands of the disabled and the elderly go untreated and without meds. What’s wrong with that picture?

I’ve rambled enough — it’s a very hot topic, John.

My step-dad was cremated, and like Bekah mentioned, is interred at a columbarium. It is kind of weird to stand next to a wall, but that’s what he wanted (he’s at a Veteran’s cemetary), so I respect that. My mom will join him in there when her time comes.

This isn’t a case of a ‘right to die’. Terry Schiavo was not dying. Her heart beats on it’s own, her lungs take in and expel air, she is not attached to any machines whatsoever. Even her feeding tube was not inserted 24 hours a day, rather only at specific feeding times. She has limited but obvious responses to her family, she is not brain dead, and other than her diminished brain function she is otherwise a healthy woman.

Her husband is the only person who claims that she once stated she would not want to be kept alive artificially, but that is hearsay, which according to our judicial process is not acceptable in a court of law. If hearsay is not allowed in the criminal process, how is it acceptable in this case?

If she were in pain and suffering, I would be strongly of the opinion to end her suffering with as much comfort and dignity as the medical profession is capable of, and I believe that artificially prolonging someone’s life when death is already imminent and inevitable is futile and unnecessarily cruel; but her death was not and has not been imminent, she is not in pain, and as she has no recognition of her own condition, in what way would she be considered to be suffering? Because she doesn’t live with the same abilities as you and I? But neither does a paraplegic, or a person who is blind.

There are thousands upon thousands who have moderate to severely diminished mental capacity, in institutions and hospices throughout the world, but we would never have the thought to end their lives because of their disabilities. One person who felt the disabled should be killed was Adolph Hitler and his regime did just that, sending 250,000 mentally and physically disabled persons to the gas chambers because they did not fit his criteria of “normal”. The world once thought of it as deplorable, have we changed so much since then, and if so, what does that say about us?

One last thought: Since Terry Schiavo is not in pain or suffering, what is the harm in allowing her to live? In allowing her parents and siblings to care for her, to show her love, and provide her comforts as they so dearly wish to do? Where is the harm?

Terry Schiavo was able to live because a feeding tube would allow her body to absorb nutrients, just as chewing and swallowing allows the same ability to sustain life for all of us. Somehow I just don’t see that difference as to how she receives her nutrition as an indication of being kept alive artificially, any more than I would consider insulin as keeping a diabetic alive artificially though without it the diabetic would surely die.

No easy answers, are there?

I also worry about passing laws for one person. That gets kind of scary IMHO.