Pseudoscientific Atheism, and the validity of Deism.

I am a great fan of many of the polemics of the new breed of vocal Atheists out there{Though I lean towards Deism as an Agnostic-Deist}, unfortunately some of them are dooing Atheism, science, and reason itself a disservice.


Case in point. Biologist and Atheist Richard Dawkins in his best seller{ for some reason found in the "science" section of your local bookstore} "The God Delusion" legitimately critizises Theism, faith, and religion. But he makes the grave mistake of taking down Agnosticism, Deism, and Pantheism with it. Granted Pantheism, beeing a "theism" is not very supportable{though it should be noted that a good percentage of so-called "Pantheists" are actually more accurately PanDeists or PanenDeists- since their God is an impersonal one, Theism neccecitates a personal god/divinity}. But Deism{PanDeism/PanenDeism} and Agnosticism are more supportable. In his book Dawkins calls Pantheism "Sexed Up Atheism", it's obvious he refers to Scientific Pantheism rather than classical Pantheism; Scientific Pantheism is poetic Atheism with poetic reverance for the natural universe, unlike classical Pantheism wherein they refer to the Universe literally beeing a intelligent and personal beeing. But Dawkins does not make that distinction.


Dawkins also essentuially accuses Agnostics of fence sitting, and Deists of beeing "watered down theists". He calls Atheism the 'default" position, that is NOT a 'belief" and does NOT need to explain itself{or themselves for "Atheists"}. Dawkins furtermore calls himself a Agnostic-Atheist but by such a small percetage of Agnosticism and in such a smarmy way that anyone using their reason can see he's merely beeing pretentious and "attempting"{rather poorly} to be "open-minded"/"open-ended".


Dawkins has began a trend of new Atheists out there that is a growing movement. He's not the only one that has infuenced this movement. Contrarian Journalist Christopher Hitchens, Philosopher/Neuroscience student Sam Harris,Philosopher and scientist Daniel Dennett and others have also influenced this movement. Personally I am a big fan of both Hitchens and Harris, as neither has gone out of their way to so blatantly mock other rationalists that are'nt Atheists{by this I mean the Agnostics and Deists}.Unfortunately, so many of the new Atheisst out there have like sheep followed their sheperd Dawkins example and effectively made a mockery of Atheism by belittling other non-theist rationalists, and by mixing{as Dawkins has} Atheism together with other ideologies with the implication that unless you also subscribe to these other ideologies and the mainstram opinion of this herd of Dawkinites- you are a heretic and not truly rational or in line with science facts. I call this the "Cult of Dawkins" or "Dawkinites".


Don't get me wrong, I like much of what Dawkins has to say, I agree with many of his opinions, and find him to be a rather laid back fellow. But Dawkins has made a joke out of Atheism and the new Atheist movement by making it so incredibly small-minded and hypocritical that so many intelligent people have bought into it. I also agree with Evangelical Christians on various issues, and find some of them to be very laid back and likable people as well, but I still comdemn their beliefs and have no problem criticising said beliefs or those views they espouse which I disagree with or see as abhorable.


The biggest mistake Dawkins and his fan club have made is in how they've attempted to corner the market on "science" for Atheism and not only Atheism, but their brand of it. Along with their utter lack of understanding about Agnocoticism, Deism, Pantheism,etc. For example, as a Deist myself, I've noticed that he and they tend to have an undersyanding of Deism that is purely limited to "Classic Deism" and the U.S. founding fathers, and have not noticed that as "liberal theism" became into beeing and more fashionable- Deism has seperated from the liberal theism of early Deism{or at least has EXANDED naturally and evolved past the views of the Deists of that era}.


Another big Mistake he/they make is in claiming the referances to God by great scientists and philosopers from the enlightenment till now, from Spinoza to Einstein to Hawkings, are just playful poetic gestures by Atheists. It's clear though from reading all their stuff that none of these were or are Atheists, Agnostics perhaps{but they all seem to lean more towards either Deism or PanDeism/PanenDeism than Atheism}. But what can be expsted, when these same hypocrital Atheist polemicists often like to make a claim that the founding fathers were Atheists{many aknowledge they were Deists of course; but even then they say...'they'd be Atheisst today", my question- "how the hell do you know that? are you psychic?}.


They've also made a huge mistake in thinking and claiming that Atheism is the rational default position, is not a 'belief", and need not explain itself.


Atheism IS a belief. AGNOSTICISM{between Atheism and Deism} is the"De-fault" that need not explain itself and is the truly faithless LACK OF BELIEF.Atheism is as much a belief, based in reason and science, as Deism is. Both Atheism and Deism are equally supportable given the evidence and theories provided us by scientists[from biologists and other earth sciences; to the sciences of the Cosmos and the quantum world such as Physics, astronomy, and Cosmology,etc}. When either Atheism or Deism claimed the market on science and reason, it makes a joke of the position, and is acting pseudoscientifically.


Science neither proves nor disproves the Atheist or Deist positions. I include in "Deism" some of it's ofshoot theories such as PanDeism and PanenDeism{mixes various aspects of Pantheism or PanenTheism with aspects of Deism}.Philosophically, both positions{Atheism,Deism and it's offshoots} are equally supportable given what we currently know about the cosmos and ourselves. But the STRONG Atheists would like us to believe that the facts PROVE Atheisms case and show DEISM to be a slightly more reasonable or less harmful version of theism. But as they like to do, they accuse Agnosticism of fence sitting thereby aiding the Deists whom beeing "watered down theists" aid the liberal theisst whom aid the liberal religionists whom aid the liberal Christians and Liberal Muslims whom in the end just provide an aid to nutty fundamentalists which aids terrorists. Ssee the mindtrap they have created, unless you are a Strong Atheist... you are helping the fundamentalists and supporting terrorism indirectly. An absurd leap of logic if ever there was one.Dawkins as his little cult of sheep have, has accused anyone and anything that isn't 100% pure Atheism of beeing pseudoscientific[and indeed some views and people are; Deists and Agnostics by far are not amongst these]. But effectively by claiming that science proves Atheism they have made themselves pseudoscientific. First of all, Science neither proves nor disproves anything related to the god question as science is UNCONCERNED with these philosophical questions{which should be relegated to "philosophy" not "science"}; There have been no experiments doen and then verfied and re-verified and peer reviewed{etc} to prove whether or not the Universe had a Creator, the questios is simply outside the realm of science and does not belong there, it belongs in "philosophy". So their claims are themselves pseudoscientific, and Dawkins is currently the biggest perpetrator of this pseudosceince in the new Atheist community{him and his growing followers}."The God Delusion" is even found, as I mentioned near the beginning of this essay, in the Science section of bookstores and libraries and is touted as a science book. But it's not, it's a Philosophical Atheist polemic/apologetic which utilizes some scientific facts and theories, this no more makes it a science book than a book polemic of Deism, or even than the pseudoscientific and rather absurd polemical books of Intelligent Design or Creationist pseudoscientists. And Dawkins growing fanclub have taken to making these same pseudoscientific and logical blunders. Even some of the other vocal Atheists in the book writing community and whatnot have begun to get sucked into the Dawkins hypocritical web{including many Scientists whom happen to be Atheists}.


Now, if they want to play the game that way and claim it is science or reason, than so be it. Then they better be willing to allow us other non-theist rationalists whom may be uncertain of Gods existence{Agnostics} or believe in a Prime Mover/First cause intelligence Creator{Deists} as well as Agnostic-Deists/PanDeists and PanenDeists into this game.


Now, that said, I refer the Dawkinites to the writings of respected Physicist Paul Davies, whom is as anti-religion as any of them, but whom displays a belief in the existence of a Deistic{more accuretely a PanDeistic or PanenDeistic} God. He has many books using science facts and theories and philosophically examining the question of Gods existence. Two of those books, which I am myself currently reading, are "The Mind of God; the scientific basis for a rational world" and "God and the new physics". Great books. I might mention that Dawkins mentions Davies in "The God Delusion" as beeing "somewhere between Einsteintonian Pantheism and an abscure form of Deism"{ie:PanDeism/PanenDeism}.


Now, these books cover many arguments,and Davies does it with a more integity towards looking at all angles than Dawkins does. Some of the Science based philosophical arguments Davies examines are the usual "argument from design" and two variations of the "cosmological argument", both of which he backs up as possible but also uses science to debunk{or in other words, shows that they are possible, but NOT needed, or rather that there are theories that challenge these two}, "Fine tuning", "conciousness", and various others.For example, he examined certain questions oft overlooked. Sure natural science explains HOW, but it does not explain why or even how natural laws are the way they are, and why these laws?


As A Deist{agnostic-deist; PanDeist/PanenDeist} I must pose these challenges and questiosn to STRONG Atheists. I had one Strong Atheist tell me there is a vaccum of evidence{ie no evidence} and the argument for "Multiverse theory"; Many Atheists also offer up the fact of the "singularity"{1}The vaccum of evidence? The Atheist cannot answer as to 'why" there are a set number of natural laws and WHEY they ARE the way they are. They cannot account for fine tuning. All they can offer is the multiverse theory{which personally appeasl to me as well}- which is a theory no less and no more valid than a Deistic intelligence.{2}They can offer the singularity, but not how it works exactly or why it exists or the exact nature of it's existence. I myself would suggest that perhaps the singularity IS GodAs a Deist I would point out the mathematical precisness of the Universe, and the absurd improbability that life[any kind; not neccaserily human or human like] could have arisen in the Universe if the initial conditions had been off by even the slightest percentage from what they were. It's allmost like those initial conditions were tweaked. Of course, even Paul Davies himself poses a challenge against this very argument{ I can't recall exact nature of his argument at the moment}- but that argument of his that some Atheists use is only theoretical itself, and it still does not account for the mathematical preciseness of the nature of the universe, why the laws are the way they are or even why there are laws in the first place and why there are a limited number of natural laws as opposed to a pure chaotic coup.


The Atheist can offer the argument of the "Static Universe", that is.. that the Universe always has been and had no beginning. That's possible, but then even most Scientists whom are Atheists believe the probability of the big bang, the Universe we know having a beginning{whether as something coming from nothing out of the singularity, or as a bubble Universe from a foam of a theoretical Multiverse}, so Static State Universe is currently, though possible, not as supported by findings as the big bang model is and most scientists support the big bang model. And though they can offer that the Universe is a neccasery and contingent thing, but they cannnot offer evidence or sound argument as to how or why it is and how or why that argument is any more valid than a neccasery intelligent prime mover force{God}.


The Cosmos display an innate intelligance. Perhaps that's illusionary and accidental, perhaps not. Ockhams Razor implies to me that it is what it seems to be...intelligent in some fashion.


Until Atheists can disprove such arguments using reason and factual proof, your theory of an atheistic universe is as and no more or les valid than our deistic one. If all you can offer is reactionary atheism against the insanity of theism, you'll have to do better than that. Deism is far removed from Theism{or at least...can be}. I offer that STRONG Atheism is a faith[at least if the atheist must call deism one}. Both are unproven but reasonable beliefs if "strong".But I suggest that both STRONG Atheism AND STRONG Deism[pandeism/panendeism} are reasonable BELIEFS about origins and nature of cosmos. If one condemns the other blindly- it is a faith{Dawkins for example displays this "faith"}. Strong Atheists like to pretend their poistion is the default, but it IS NOT! Agnosticism between the afforemetnioned two positions IS. Agnostic-Atheism and Agnostic-Deism{pan/en/deism} are just LEANINGS.


I've not seen a single STRONG Atheist or STRONG Deist dismantle these arguments or show them as false. And when they attempt they only wind up making themselves seem lke hypocritical faith-based fools asserting absolutes that they cannot possible know YET.


I might also offer this fact, that SOME Deists also make similar illogical, pseudoscientific, and hypocritical blunders as outlined here about many in the new Atheist movement. Allthough, the ratio of Vocal Deists to Vocal Atheistas acting so hypocritically is much smaller, though they DO exist. Paul Davies is obviously one of the more reasonable ones{moreseo than Dawkins and his adoring sheep} as are most others I've noticed.


So there you have it. Evidence and argument showing the hypocritical attitude and even pseudoscientific attitude of many of todays STRONG Atheists, pretenders to the throne of reason that they are, and specifically of Richard Dawkins and his clones. And the philosophical and scientific case for Deism{s}.


Deist polemicists of note:-Thomas Paine{revolutionary, polemicist, human rights advocate, U.S. foundinf father,etc}-
-Aristotle{greek philosopher}
-Voltaire{enlightenment philosopher}
-John Armstrong{Author "God Vs. The Bible", godvsthebible.com}
-Antony Flew{philosopher, former atheist polemicist}
-Raymond Fontaine, Ph.D. {Author of "My life with God in and outside the church"; deism.com}-Baruch Spinoza{Pandeism/panandeism/pantheism}
-Albert Einstein{^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^}
....AND of course- Physicist Paul Davies


Some of my favorite Atheist polemicists:
-Christopher Hitchens{Anti-theist and Contrarian. Journalist, Author of "god is not GREAT" amongst many other books on politics, religion, and various issues as well as numerous articles}
-Sam Harris{author- 'the end of faith"....amongst others.


Please feel free to discuss.

In Reason:
Bill Baker

On Terri Shiavo,god,politics, and the right to die.

I have spent the last couple of weeks watching the Terri Shiavo case closely via the news.
My heart and mind are heavy w/sorrow and anger.
There was a time when I was adamantly opposed to euthanaisia and the right to die,etc. Beeing that I was myself a hardcore Christian pro-lifer{anti-abortion} type of person.

As time has progressed I have altered my views on this matter. I am now staunchly in favour of both euthanasia and the rigth to die. The Terry Shiavo case has also affected mindset very deeply. I cannot for the life of me understand why this torture of the poor woman or other people in smilar vegatative states, not to mention the amount of money it takes to force someone whom would have naturally died{by the natural laws of the Universe as set up by whoever or whatever Created it it all or "is" it all}.

What I find the most disturbing about Terrys case{and others like hers} is that she has been PROVEN to be in a proven vegetative state w/little to no hope of recovering from it, and close to 15 years of beeing stuck in it pretty much proves the point that she is not going to get better, barring some sort of miracle, but as much as we may wish to see miracles in such cases happen-they never really do! It's fantasy, and it's a fantasy that costs people n such states decades of torture, costs nature{and or the Creator/Creative force it's sovereignty to be natural and usurps it's place of having natural laws that regulate the world; for example when we force people to live in such states we just contribute to a overpopulation problem on the planet that is depleting it's natural resources and contributing to variuos other environmental,social,etc, problems on the planet; there is a reason why nature or the Creator/Creative force/whatever has set up natural laws of life and natural death}.

As I was saying, what is truly disturbing in this case of Mrs. Shiavo, is the political and religious circus it was turned into{and to make maters worse, the religious right forces and the the anti-abortion,etc, forces of the U.S. have promised that if Terrys feeding tube was not put back in and she was "allowed' to die-that there would be hell to pay form them...SCARY!!!}.
I have personally fought to hold off my hatred towards these heartless religious fools during the last two weeks, but they have caused such passionate hate towards Christianity to rise up in me, and I've dealt w/personal hate towards them as people{which I've fought to moderate rather than let control me}.
Why? Good question.

The mantra of these fools is "sanctity of life" and "Gods will".
I wonder, what do these clowns know about "sanctity of life" and "Gods will"
Sanctity of Life, what about the natural law of "SANCTITY OF DEATH?"
This poor woman has been FORCED to live in this state for 15 years!!! So, these religious pipe-dream fools may claim, well...her spirit is alive and vibrant. GET OFF IT!!! You can't tell me that you would appreciate beeing forced to live in a vegetative state for so long w/no hopes of recovering{w.evidence stated by mediucal professionals as such}, forced to live in a box unable to express yourself AT ALL!, unable to-possibly not even aware of the instinct to survive and to feed onself{regardless if one is able to or not}, forced to live in a biological prison that is sustained by huamn made machines!!! With parts of your brain working and other parts not, with any show of emotion on your face and any reaction physically to touch just beeing nerves and as far as gthe expresions go-dreams and nightmares and perhaps memories and that's it!!!
I say bluntly to all those whom say they would want to...LIARS!!! You are lying to others, and lying to yourselves!!! However, you do have the right to choose I suppose, but if your prolonged life affects others financially,affects the natural process of life and DEATH and interferes w/natures way of keeping nature in balance and to stave off overpopulation and overuse of natural recourses and stuff-then how can your right trump that of everyonse else,nature, and perhaps even the natural will of whatever or whoever Created or brought the natural universe to fruition by setting up it's evolution to happen!
How is it "Sanctity of life" to torment someones body and mind like this???!!! On top of this-it also affects the "sanctity of life" of the loved one sof somene in thsi kind of state. Lets take Mrs.Shiavos case here; her loved ones have forced her to live in this state merely for selfish ends of not wanting to let go and let the natural process of death take place, they have been selfish in that their religious moral views and their own desire to not be without her have trumped her right to die a natural death and prolonged hers and their suffering! Why not just move on, it is the natural way of life and death. What are Terrys family afraid of? Really, they beleive in biblegod and bibleheavan right? Well then..."if" their god were real, why don't they just let her go to be w/that god and be at peace and rest finally??? "Sanctity of life", it's a catchphrase beeing abused for selfish ends.
I can't pretend to understand the pain that Terris' parents and family have gone through seeing their loved one in this state, but I do understand that yes,psychollogically, it can be difficult to let a love done go and move on; I feel for her family- I do; but they are just playing god and usurping the throne of nature.{Now there are cases where using technology to keep someone alive is beneficial, a mechanical heart for example-where a person can actually have some quality in their given life; or...if someone is in a brain damaged state but still can have quality to life and interaction w/other social beeings or if not-if the medical professionals say that the chances of someone coming out of that state before too long are highly probbale if not actual-than yeah-prolonging is a good thing=ditto can be said for "some" cases of people in comas} But,there is no REASON to force someone to live out all their days in this kind of tormented state other than selfishness, and t is imposing on that persons will and right to die and either go back to the earth or back to the "source" and have some fuckin peace.

Now, speaking of the "source", we now get to the "Gods will" part.
I.myself personally believe either in a Destic,Pantheistic,or Panendeistic view of this "source". www.deism.org www.deism.com www.pantheism.net www.pantheist.net www.panendeism.com {in case you do not know these philosophies at all, you can check these links}.
Now, first off I'm going to play devils advocate w/their Christian conception of God, just to show their hypocrisy and their absurdity and selfishness.
"If" this god actually exists, then...are'nt these dumbasss right-to-lifers{?} and Christian right-wingers{botht eht regular people, and the religious fucks in the govt}usurping their gods throne and will? I mean, did not this very god{"if" it exists; which I don't believe so myself} set up the natural laws that govern life and death? By forcing her to live{or forcing anyone in such states to live in such a state}are these clowns not telling their own god{and all other conceptions of a god} "FUCK YOU!"? If a person is going to die w/out such imposing human technology, and that technology is not going to give any quality at all to their life{it can be useful and "good" -IF it is meant to make ones life better and more fullfilling}, is that not "GODS WILL"? Are you not taking the right from that god to bring his creation home and end her/his suffering? What good doe sit even do your own selfish egos and wants to keep your loved ones w/you in such states, you know that you feel the hidden temptation to curse your god everytime you see your love done in such a suffering state, you are not only prolonging their suffering, but your own and your gods{"IF" he/she/it exists}. HOW SELFISH to steal from the/your Creator{or your conception of it} like that!!!
These are things that the Shindlers{Terrys family},and the Republican party, the Bush family, and the religious right-to life hypocrites need to take into seriuos account! [It s also someothing that all of whom are in similar situations should seriusly consider].

I am utterly disgusted w/the religious Christian forces that the Shindlers in their despair rallied. These fuckers{the religious forces-not the Shindlers, please don't misunderstand my insult} even went so far as to invade Terrys husbands privacy, and harrased him; I saw in the paper one day a bunch of these bloody hypocrites kneeling in front on Micheal Shiavos home w/protest signs, stickers on their mouths, praying and beeing complete assholes!!! My gawd!!! If I were Micheal or even just one of his neighbors, I would've called the cops on them, and if that did'nt work-I'd have gone out and spit in each of their faces and shoved 'em off onto the road! There fake love is hatred in disguise, they are hypocrites and wolves in sheeps clothing.
Then ther are the dozens and dozens of Christians that gathered outside Terri's hospice, whom exploited Terris suffering and death to selfishly push their faith and their religious morals, this circus of clowns even extended to the upper echelons of the federal govt, they wasted preciuos time and energy{that could've been spent dooing ACTUAL CHARITY helping the poor,downtrodden,oppressed, and homelss/starving here and abroad in 3rd world debating the private case of the Shaivaos and Shindlers; what a fucking joke!!!} they even went so far as to pray and to blur the lines between seperation of Church and state, even the tyrant Bush family weighed in to prolong Terrys suffering{not a surprise; they love to inflict suffering on innocent people}!!! What a travesty of democracy,freedom,govt, and religion!!!
Christians tried to bring water to Terry agianst the law, and rightly they got arrested.
These religious fools, and the govt, both ignored the medical professionals stated facts that Terry was'nt really aware of anything around her, that she was essenitally{mostly} braindead and would'nt recover!
Nope, instead they and Terrys family took selected footage of Terri that 'seemed' like she was reacting to others and smiling and shit, which in reality the medical professionals stated time and again was mere chance, that at other times she would'nt in other words-it's nerves and perhaps dreams/memories. That footage was really used to subvert the reality and the facts, this is truly sad and disguting!

The so-called "charity" and "good-will/works" and "Altruism" ,etc of the Christian rightists and the Bushes and Republicans was mainly selfish and egotistical. Oh, how those fuckers trying to bring Terri water in her final days must got quite an ego boost looking good to all their fellow religionists on international television striving against the police and the meidcia professionlas and getting their sorry asses righly arrested{of course, you know they are going to claim a ungodly persecution against Christians and God because of this}fools!!!
Thier true hidden motive was themsleves,their religion, and their god; and Terry just happened to be a useful tool for their ends! The Politicians, well, of course the Republicans and the Bushes joined in this parade of stupidity, dooing so makes them look good to a powerful and wealthy Christian right voting group{s}; yes-they were pandering to the religious right-that was their motive!
Where were these people beforehand in Terrys case{and by the way she is not the only one in this kind of situation, she just happenned to be a convenient face for their selfish religious and political cuases}, where are they when children are starving down the street from them, where are they when there are billions of starving and oppressed people in the 3rd world? Oh yeah-in their fucking pews in their god-forsaken churches w/their nice clothes and jewelery on -in their pumped up emotional worship states of their psyches, and living in their beautiful nicely decorated suburban homes, enjoying large and yummy meals, enjoying their movies about their religion "passion of the christ", "left behind"{books and movies } and their christian top 40 music, and the millions of dollars sunk into making this propaganda shit!!! That's where they are!!!
Yes, their true colors shone through loud and clear!

Of course, I agree that removing Terrys tube and leaving her to starve and dehydrate for two weeks was'nt exactly the most ethical thing to do either; for the life of me I cannot grasp why the ell they did'nt just put her to sleep w/a needle or something, a much more humane death, much less suffering; however two weeks of that to death is the lesser of two evils when compared to forcing her to live decades in that state.

I'm sorry that Terry is dead,I'm sorry her loved ones have lost her, but it was time to let nature take it course, and let the creator- whoever or whatever it is, take this energy/matter called Terry back. It was time for her needless suffering to end,and the needless of suffering of all whom claim to love her.

Speaking of which, Micheal Shiavios love!
Throughout this whole damn sideshow, the religious right{amongst others} have demonized this poor man. Focusing on his restrictions to Terrys family seeing her, and on his beeing w/another woman.
Is he selfish to want to move on w/another woman-sure! it would also be selfish of him to not do so, as he would be supressing his natural needs.
Now I do not now whether Micheal was telling the truth or not about the conversation he and Terry had years and years ago where she allegedly told him that she would not want to be in that kind of vegetative state and forced to live; but ethically and legally as her legal partner and guardian it is right to decide whether she live sor dies in this case, ethicists agree. The law alos agreed consistently w/him for years on end; who knows maybe they gave hima polygraph or something to determine whether this conversation actually happenned or ot, and perhaps he passed, maybe she did say so.
WORST THING IS...that even "if" she did say so, and even "if" she expressed it in writing, the religiuos christian fools and their pro-life{try pro-hypocrisy} forces have stated that they'd still fight to keep her alive{which would be against her stated and proven will} in which case-they have shown the fact that this not about Terry to them, it is about them and their religion.

Now, Micheal has had to deal w/lot of hypocrisy from the religious Shindlers, his wife whom he loved has been forced to suffer in this state, and he has been forced to be stigmatized as an adulterer for moving on after so many years w/anothe woman to fullfill his natural nature/creator/creative force given needs and desires for emotional and sexual intimacy. It's no wonder he tried to keep his wifes family from seeing her at times, they seem to get a sick religiuos joy out of her suffering and their own suffering{but then "suffering" is a pillar of the absurd Christian faith after all}-god forbid anyone should be allowed to have joy,peace,fullfillment, quality of life, or the right to natural death!
However, he has still allowed them access, as they are her family. Maybe at times the man has acted innapropriately towards them, but given the circumstances, it is somewhat understandable, though no-he was not in the right to do so. But lets cut the man some slack.
Lets also cut the man some slack in the fact that he has had a girlfriend for some time. I'd love to see how long one of these rleigious hypocrites could last and repress their bodys and psyches natural needs if they were in his shoes!

Now again, I don't wish to be too hard on the Shindlers; as I Stated, I have not been in their shoes and cannot fully grasp their pain, but why they wished to prolong their own,Micheals, and Terrys pain is hard to understand w/out seeing the selfish motives for it. I am not trying to attack them, I feel sympathy for them, but...
Also, Micheal would have shown much more compassion for his wife had he begged the courts to stick a needle in her and end her suffering quickly and humanely as opposed to yanking out the feeding tube and alowing her to starve and dehydrate for two weeks. But, from what I'e heard many medical professionals said that she would not feel the pain{or not much anyways} die to beeing mostly in a vegatative near braindead state.

Now my personal view has of the last little while become that these kinds of cases, because of their emotional,phsychollogical,financial, and other strains on loved ones, other people, the hospitals, human population, nature, whatever possible Creator/Creative force "may" exist, and the physical and sub/unconciuos burdens and perhaps even spiritiual burdens{like beeing locked in a cell not ale to communicate or interact at all}on the individuals in such states. that the law should be changed, people because they do not wish to part w/their loved ones should not be legally allowed to force their will for this on their loved ones{unless stated in a living will that they wished to be kept alive} that are in such states or on themselves, the medical professionals, society at large,nature,etc.
OR...In the very least, such cases should not be allowed to be made into such circuses, and facts should weigh over religious biases, compassion over selfish deire to not lose a loved one to natural death and over religious/theological beliefs{which in a case like Terry Shiavos, religion has harmed this poor woman and her loved ones; not mention the world at large in this case becaise of the circus that the religious right made it into, so much}.
Of course, I do not have the final say, the medical professionals and law decide such things.
Just stating my current emotional view.
I also think, that whether or not my view in the few sentences above are right or not; lets say they are'nt{I'm open to that possibiity, and could alter my opinion on that particular part of the argument}that such circuses around such private matters should not be allowed. And for this,sadly, Terrys parents were to blame, Micheal never asked for this circus,this travesty, they did, they begged the religious right and the Bushes and the republican party to step over the ethical line and make this into a circus, they allowed their daughters suffering and death to be made circus and a mockery of! They even requested it.

As for the Buses, specifically Jeb Bush{Florida state governer; where this happenned} in this case, they should lose their power positions since they abused them{which is nothing new for the Bush fmaily criminal religious/elite dynasty}.
The religious right leaders whom put on this circus sidshow outside Terrys hospice and outside Micheals private home, should ALL be rounded up and fined financially for it; the one sin charge of it{:Jesse Jackson for example} should be fined very heftily!!!
And such a mockery should never EVER be allowed to occur again w/out seriuos consequences; they cheapened Terris sufeering and death.
I'm sad that Terrys is dead, I'm more sad[and disgusted] that she was forced to suffer{or live} in that state for so long in the name of "god" and "religion" and "sanctity of life"{all of which have been spit upon by this}; However I'm very glad to hear that her suffering is over, that this charade is done.
I still feel sympathy for her parents and family{and even moreso for Micheal}, though it was her parents and family that ended up initiatiting this circus charade{religious and political} and exploitaion of Terry;
but to the religious rightists whom never knew Terry personally or hardly knew her{or her family and Micheal for that matter}, I say -HA! See the power of your impotent god to keep he alive!
I get a gleeful satisfaction out of seeing their prayers and their wasted efforts to subvert Terrys rights, and natures rights,etc, come to naught!!
Gee... does'nt the Babble..er..Bible teach that even a shred of faith{as small as a mustard seed} in a believer in Jesus as Gods incarnate/son/propitiation -that such such will have gods/christs spirit work great miracles through each and every believer{not just designated "faith healer' clowns-whom all turn out to be a joke anyways}- "even greater things tha will you do, cause I go to the father"-Jesus, "whatever you aks in my name, will be done"{of course your retort is- "if it's according to gods will", HOW CAN IT 'NOT' BE GODS WILL TO NOT ONLY KEEP SOMEONE IN THAT KIND OF STATE ALIVE- BUT ALSO RESTORE HER HEALTH FULLY TO HIS/HER/ITS GLORY BEFORE HUMANKIND!!!; you all pick and choose, if something bad happens-it's gods will, something good happens it's Gods will; gee let me try tis, I believe in the purple elephant of heavan-so when something good happens- I project it onto the purple elephant, if something bad happens-visa versa; see the lunacy here???}.
As Neitzsche said "God is dead"{or at least bible-koran-torahgod/montheistic/personal and anthropormorphic god is dead}, or it exists but is indifferent to us-like a scientist or something; or perhaps not eterrnally indifferent, but temporarily indifferent having bestowed us through evolutiuon w/reason and the ability to look at the universe and personally/subjectively/relativistically see design, and/or how abou this-it does'nt care to be worshipped-it's beyond that kinda pettiness!!!

I can understand emotionally the selfish motives of both Terris parents/siblings/etc and Micheals too. They have all treated each other like dirt, and they need to admit their wrongs in this and move on. Though the major reasons for the demonization of Micheal{having a girlfriend}-that is unfair, at times not allowing her family to visit-he acted unfair, but then again-so have they! I am prone to side more w/Micheal however, and I do think that he made a grave mistake in not begging the law to put her to sleep humanely as opposed to the starvation/dehydration-slow death process.

I leave this post w/some comments about this case
from some fellow posters from the"Faithless Community"{ www.faithless.org } websites Mesage boards/forums{ a sister site and project of the Universist movement- www.universist.org }:: I think their comments are quite fitting for this post: All their names are their pseudonymns from the forum not their real names and are in= \ /

"If these people care so much about 'gods will', then they are beeing hypocritical to that will. She would've died 15 years ago, medical science is what saved her life{NOTE: from me-Bill Iconoclastithon Baker; OR PROLONGED HER SUFFERING}"- \Age of reason/ {note from me}

"Terri did'nt leave the bad legacy...she showed the rest of the world how sick, melodramatic and hypocritical Christianity can be"- \Helmespc/

"She died.... what a crappy legacy her parents and these fools{NOTE; from Bill= the Christian right/Bushes/Republicans} have left her with"- \Speedsashe/ [correspind this one with the one above it]

"So many people are makng money out of Terry Shiavos case and playing politics, most of whom could care less about her condition"-\Busman/

"Those Lawyers must be rollin in it..."- \Helmespc/

"Seems to me, the people that don't know god are these people bringing her water. If this is a 'god' thing...god has stopped her mouth from taking in food, she does'nt even KNOW to eat when she is hungry; in the natural world{the last 500,000 years} such a beeing in this state would have died. Yep, shge would've starved to death. It is through mans artificial means of keeping this poor shell of a human alive! {NOTE: from Bill= to suffer and be a needless burden on her loved ones and on nature,etc}.
It's horrible that this has to happen, these situations such for anyone involved, it's hard to watch someone you love die, but...dieing is a part of life, t's OK. It's hard to let someone go, but I really feel the parents are beeing selfish. Let her move on damn it! hey are Christians, so they believe she will be floating off to heavan to be w/the lord. Well then let her float away, she's in a horrible situation. She does'nt even KNOW to fullfill the instict to nurish herself... come on people!"-\Psychenaut/

And finally, one for the biblegod-worshippers to think about;

"Amazing! If tens of thousands{perhaps more} people of 'faith' were earnestly praying for Terrys life to be spared and it was'nt, that means one of three things:
1}God{as they concieve him} does not exist
2}God heard but chose not to answer their prayers
3}GOD WANTED TERRY TO DIE!
he certainly does'nt need a feeding tube to save someones life{NOTE: from Bill=or perhaps maybe-heal them!}or at least he SHOULD'NT-beeing god and all!"- \Zeon/


Let compassion reign only when it is mixed w/REASON and evidences, otherwise it is just hypocrisy,fake piety, and lies!!!-The Very Irreverand Bill "Iconoclastithon" Baker