What's the difference between Michael Schiavo and Billy Graham in pulling out their wives' feeding tubes?

You are so right it leaves me speechless. I didn't know until I read your post. How dare they go against Ruth's wishes. And how dare the church condemn Michael Schiavo for doing the same to save he and his wife from further torture. I can still remember the circus that was the right-wing and Christian media spreading their horrific hatred everywhere and lying about Michael and Terri's relationship. How dare he be made to wait so many years to give his beautiful wife respite. Those who say the Bible is out of the court are Christian. And we know they've twisted more stories than almost anyone.

I'm so glad you asked such a terrific question. Just the mention of Michael Schiavo made my heart beat quickly - the disgust with how he was treated is still fresh within me. The hypocrisy is never-ending and is destroying our earth. These people should be ashamed of themselves.

Midge, you nincompoop, Michael Schiavo could do nothing to help his wife until he received the settlement due him because lawyers who might have to against the word of your precious Bible are more expensive than Porsches.

And for whoever of you said MIchael had moved on, do you realize how many years later that was? How dare you deny his grief. You have never been through such tragedy. I really wish you'd keep your mouth zipped.

United_Peace - I hope you don't mind but I linked to this question. I believe everyone should read it and then speak their piece.

There is one difference. By all accounts Ruth Graham wanted the tube removed whereas with Terri Schaivo there was abundant evidence that she would NOT have wanted her feeding tube removed. In the Schaivo case the trial judge ignored all of the testimony except that of her estranged husband and his brother.

Concerning the charges of hypocrisy I believe that these charges are justified. Starving someone to death violates Christian ethics. Conservative Evangelicals should understand this better than anyone else. As one who has been an an Evangelical Christian for 26 years and who will never ask for the removal of a feeding tube of either myself or a loved one (although I view with compassion those who are faced with such choices) I can say with confidence that Evangelicalism today is not the same as it was 25 years ago. (Schaeffer:1). Leadership, however retains the same form of theology and politics.This inconsistency between form and substance is revealed when Christian moral principles are selectively applied.The difference in how Evangelicals and Conservatives treat Billy Graham and Michael Schaivo is one such case.

1 http://www.rationalpi.com/theshelter/disaster.html

As usual, a lot of people seem to be missing the points you've made.

Point one: Billy Graham is doing exactly what the fundies jumped all over Terri Schiavo's husband for doing, but they seem to be ignoring what Billy's doing. That's the hypocracy.

Point Two: I think that burying dead bodies is ridiculous, yet those who don't feel that way seem to have no problem with Billy's wife's being denied her wishes (even I wouldn't do that). If you know that someone's wishes on such a subject have been the same for years, you don't suddenly have them sign a paper to change them at a time when they may be incompetent. That's simply taking advantage of the situation. Hypocracy.

The problem with some fundies is that they never see anything they don't want to see.

By the way, Terri Schiavo was not in a coma. Her brain had turned to mush -- she no longer existed. Machines were keeping the body alive, but no one was in there.

Ruth Graham lived a long and fulfilling life. She had been very sick for a very long time. No doubt she had medical testing done, unlike Terri Schiavo. (The agony could have been spared with a simple scan, which Michael Schiavo did not allow.) Billy Graham has his own money, too, and no woman on the side (he couldn't do anything with his conditions, either--do you see what a wreck he is right now?), and absolutely no reason to cash in on her condition. And I don't recall him speaking out on the Schiavo case. All this is to say, I don't see hypocrisy, just an elderly couple with only bad choices. Most of us hope to grow old with that special someone. Well, this is the kind of thing that happens when you get there, regardless of religion or politics. I can't really judge what people do at that stage.

That said, it's awful that she's not being buried where she wants, and I think that "library" looks awful, too. Maybe Billy Graham really wanted to be buried there and she decided to go along with that, I don't know. At any rate, she's at least out of her agony and beyond caring.

The article is a bit of a jumble of different things. It contradicts an article I read yesterday which unfortunately I can not find again. I do remember reading months ago that she and her husband had decided to be buried at the library (which seems so sick to me, a bit egotistical).

The article you posted says that on Sunday it was her birthday and she received visitors. The article I read yesterday said that she was awake and fully aware on Sunday making the reporting of this tube removal strange...since one would have to assume she agreed to removing it and who the hell would do that? Wouldn't that be suicide then (being a bit extreme I know)?

Okay, so there is no difference between the two men regarding this issue (Schiavo and Graham); both are messed up because liquid should never be stopped.

How many of you have actually worked in such a situation and cared for someone on a feeding tube after a stroke, etc?? I have done that work for many years, have watched the families and the patient, etc. I don't give much credibility towards the news reports of such things. Since a husband and wife of many years would know of each others wishes in this regard. It is insulting when the rest of the world views such a painful time as something different.

Death is a sure event for all of us. My being a theist and your being an atheist can not change the divine law.

When one pulls out the tube, it is in most cases, not out of one's real voltions, but mostly out of compulsions. Tell me why don't we keep the dead body of a dear one with us instead of burying him? The compulsion here is that the body is of no use to us now, in fact we fear that it will rot and make our life miserable. So we are selfish in disposing off the body.

We are hypocrites in everything that we do, and that includes our donations etc. If we have a sudden fall from our present position we will be repenting for the donations that we made. We all are actors in this world. Some, like atheists can act better, some are theists like me are hams.

Billy Graham's as huge a phony and liar as any of the other, more lurid fundy preachers. He just pals around with our "president" (not elected by majority) and other big-wigs, so people THINK he's a good guy.

This is a HORRIBLE story and shows his true colors! He oughtta have a buggy whip taken to his and his son's fat a**es and I hope her family steps in, if she has any, and takes the posers to court!

This sad, sordid tale: just another example of the hypocrisy & double-standard of the Xtian-right!

At least now we all KNOW Billy Graham's a friggin', selfish, lying PIG!

It's interesting that Michael Schaivo was all for caring for Terri , according to court documents at her settlement hearings until he was rewarded the settlement then he immediately proceeded to spend 70,000.00 for an attorney to try to have her killed. He never has had to answer to important questions like what did he do between the time Terri fell unconscious and the time he called 911, a 4 hour stretch by the way!!. There is much about the Terri Scaivo case that is very disturbing. Billy Graham though is not a Catholic so I cannot say why they are acting like this. Did they at least leave an IV in for some fluids?

Catholics are for life and this denomination is iffy

I think it's quite horrible that in order to "let someone die" you starve them to death. I'm more understanding on behalf of the late Mrs. Schiavo's case because she suffered alot of brain damage. However that's as far as my understanding goes because she was still functioning, and if I'm not mistaken, the only life support she was on was her feeding tube.

I think it's quite odd that the Reverend would remove his wife's feeding tube in this situation. The article says "Earlier in the week, she was talking and asking for Coca-Cola, chocolate and gravy, Ned said, and staff members occasionally slipped a bit onto her tongue." She was still in and out of consciousness, it's not as if she was in CVS or on full life support. If this story doesn't stir up controversy, the I have to say I'd be quite disappointed in his followers. At the very least for not standing up against someone who preaches righteousness and does something so wrong.