Pro-choice doctrine, including selective-child, selective exclusion, class diversity, etc., causes debasement of human life. At least people who are euthanized will have taken their first breath and expressed their will. That would qualify as positive progress.
Check out “Boomsday” by the funny and great Chris Buckley.
Premise: Young people start a political campaign for Boomers to kill themselves. A money thing. It is coming. Sarah Palin was right.
Hillary Clinton must be defeated.
Carthage must be destroyed.
n.n.:
But the linked article describes euthanasia without the person’s consent.
This really should surprise no one.
It’s things like this that annoy me when people talk about how “sophisticated” Europeans are. Nowadays, “sophistication” means rationalizing horrible things like abortion, euthanasia, et cetera.
Tatter’s Law: The first poster in any thread will never have taken the time to read the linked sources, seldom takes the time to even read the blog entry, and frequently doesn’t even take time trying to spell the words “first post!” correctly.
Tatter’s Law: hee hee
I would be slightly careful with it, and wouldn’t make any judgement without reading the paper.
In Spain we had a similar case a few years ago. A doctor was fired and called “nazi” and “assessin” by mass media, saying he was euthanizing people without consent.
Truth was that he was giving strong sedation in cases of terminal people dying under great pain. Such a thing indeed “kills” people, which means that with it you’ll live a few hours less.
It’s not clear in the abstract what the author is considering as “euthanasia”, and it seems that he’s including terminal sedation among it.
Be aware that Belgium, as Spain, is a Catholic country. Catholicism considers suffering as part of the divine path (in Spain the expression “valley of tears” was used to describe life in opposition to after-life). So terminal sedation is highly opposed by religious people.
In my opinion, the dangerous path is to put together real euthanasia and terminal sedation.
Basically, those doctors are admitting to murder. How many do it but don’t, so overtly, admit it? I have heard of cases where the children have the doctors do it, pretty much just to make sure they get and inheritance. What other reasons could there be? But the doctors… do no harm… They should know better. Must not believe in heaven or hell, just… larger clumps of cells, innit?
I am not surprised. I expected it. I also believed that their government would not get involved. The one of few times when “doctor-patient” privilege is actually still “respected”? Tells you as much about their government, though abortion tells you just as much. This is just a new venue for the same thing.
Neither ancient Roman nor Greek culture disapproved of abortion, infanticide, suicide, or euthanasia. Interesting that we’re jettisoning 2,000 years of Judeo-Christian culture and reverting to those ancient times, and yet we’re told instead that we’re “evolving”.
Resist the “right to die” movement at all costs.
It always leads to the duty to die. Oldsters and the chronically sick are being selfish for hogging valuable resources.
“Why don’t they just do the decent thing and die? Aw, heck, who cares? Let’s as a society send them on their way, whether they want to go or not.”
Elderly patients in Holland are afraid to go to the hospital because they worry they’ll just be given the same needle the leftist defense bar claims is inhumane to give convicted killers.
I’m sure it’s much the same in Belgium. I wonder how Catholic it is these days. But then, I wonder the same thing about the Vatican these days.
Next up: Eugenics!
Fascism is characteristic of our era. Because USA won WW2 and the Cold War, we too often think there hateful, inhuman ideologies have been defeated. They have not. In face, they are winning.
Beverly Says:
June 20th, 2015 at 1:44 am
Next up: Eugenics!
Eugenics, euthanasia have deep American roots.
It was common parlance in the West in the 20’s and 30’s. In line with the communist concept of a “Rational Society.”
As to MDs and euthanasia, it happens routinely in a end-of-life context. Lived through it in my family. I didn’t object.
If euthanasia is institutionalized … we have a big problem. The wackjobs will take over.
The veneer of civilization is thin. That is why one needs be able to defend it. Very personally, very individually, in a very ornery way.
What I fear – and I believe my fears are not entirely irrational – is some sort of a move from explicit towards presumed consent.
It has already happened in many European countries with things such as organ donation, by implementing the opt-out system. If something happens to you and you are declared dead under whatever the current (lowered and not without medical controversy) criteria for being considered dead, they may take your organs – unless you have specifically opted out at an earlier point in your life.
Now, imagine the same logic applied to this problem: unless you have specifically opted out at an earlier point in your life, under certain conditions doctors may *presume* you consent to euthanasia. If it were a law, it would open up a lot of space for potential abuse, especially as euthanasia is more easily approved in a wider array of cases and on lesser grounds than it was originally intended (e.g. for psychological suffering alone).
Maybe I am just paranoid.
Anna:
I don’t think you’re just paranoid at all.
neo-neocon:
You’re right. I was thinking of another European story where “doctors” would assist killing patients with a low quality of life. However, this story is comparable to the Schiavo euthanasia and selective-child policy.
The process is purely progressive from conception to a premeditated death. Perhaps it is inevitable that quality of life will be prioritized over life. There seems to be a growing consensus to reject The Hippocratic Oath and similar moral standards (e.g. Judaeo-Christian).
This story is also reported from Belgium. In fact, both stories probably have the same root, but are presented from different perspectives. The reported story: “The Death Treatment”, covers assisted suicide for people with low quality of life. I imagine that this perspective underlies the progress of pro-choice doctrine in liberal societies.
The Libertarian idiots said there would be no slippery slope. Were the idiots the fools or the ones who believed the fools?
People underestimate the power of the Leftist alliance, at their own risk.
Pro-choice doctrine, including selective-child, selective exclusion, class diversity, etc., causes debasement of human life. At least people who are euthanized will have taken their first breath and expressed their will. That would qualify as positive progress.
Check out “Boomsday” by the funny and great Chris Buckley.
Premise: Young people start a political campaign for Boomers to kill themselves. A money thing. It is coming. Sarah Palin was right.
Hillary Clinton must be defeated.
Carthage must be destroyed.
n.n.:
But the linked article describes euthanasia without the person’s consent.
This really should surprise no one.
It’s things like this that annoy me when people talk about how “sophisticated” Europeans are. Nowadays, “sophistication” means rationalizing horrible things like abortion, euthanasia, et cetera.
Tatter’s Law: The first poster in any thread will never have taken the time to read the linked sources, seldom takes the time to even read the blog entry, and frequently doesn’t even take time trying to spell the words “first post!” correctly.
Tatter’s Law: hee hee
I would be slightly careful with it, and wouldn’t make any judgement without reading the paper.
In Spain we had a similar case a few years ago. A doctor was fired and called “nazi” and “assessin” by mass media, saying he was euthanizing people without consent.
Truth was that he was giving strong sedation in cases of terminal people dying under great pain. Such a thing indeed “kills” people, which means that with it you’ll live a few hours less.
It’s not clear in the abstract what the author is considering as “euthanasia”, and it seems that he’s including terminal sedation among it.
Be aware that Belgium, as Spain, is a Catholic country. Catholicism considers suffering as part of the divine path (in Spain the expression “valley of tears” was used to describe life in opposition to after-life). So terminal sedation is highly opposed by religious people.
In my opinion, the dangerous path is to put together real euthanasia and terminal sedation.
Basically, those doctors are admitting to murder. How many do it but don’t, so overtly, admit it? I have heard of cases where the children have the doctors do it, pretty much just to make sure they get and inheritance. What other reasons could there be? But the doctors… do no harm… They should know better. Must not believe in heaven or hell, just… larger clumps of cells, innit?
I am not surprised. I expected it. I also believed that their government would not get involved. The one of few times when “doctor-patient” privilege is actually still “respected”? Tells you as much about their government, though abortion tells you just as much. This is just a new venue for the same thing.
Neither ancient Roman nor Greek culture disapproved of abortion, infanticide, suicide, or euthanasia. Interesting that we’re jettisoning 2,000 years of Judeo-Christian culture and reverting to those ancient times, and yet we’re told instead that we’re “evolving”.
Resist the “right to die” movement at all costs.
It always leads to the duty to die. Oldsters and the chronically sick are being selfish for hogging valuable resources.
“Why don’t they just do the decent thing and die? Aw, heck, who cares? Let’s as a society send them on their way, whether they want to go or not.”
Elderly patients in Holland are afraid to go to the hospital because they worry they’ll just be given the same needle the leftist defense bar claims is inhumane to give convicted killers.
I’m sure it’s much the same in Belgium. I wonder how Catholic it is these days. But then, I wonder the same thing about the Vatican these days.
Next up: Eugenics!
Fascism is characteristic of our era. Because USA won WW2 and the Cold War, we too often think there hateful, inhuman ideologies have been defeated. They have not. In face, they are winning.
Beverly Says:
June 20th, 2015 at 1:44 am
Next up: Eugenics!
Eugenics, euthanasia have deep American roots.
It was common parlance in the West in the 20’s and 30’s. In line with the communist concept of a “Rational Society.”
As to MDs and euthanasia, it happens routinely in a end-of-life context. Lived through it in my family. I didn’t object.
If euthanasia is institutionalized … we have a big problem. The wackjobs will take over.
The veneer of civilization is thin. That is why one needs be able to defend it. Very personally, very individually, in a very ornery way.
I blame the voters….
Eugenics, euthanasia have deep American roots.
From Moral Relativism to Reality Relativism.
Germane to this thread.
What I fear – and I believe my fears are not entirely irrational – is some sort of a move from explicit towards presumed consent.
It has already happened in many European countries with things such as organ donation, by implementing the opt-out system. If something happens to you and you are declared dead under whatever the current (lowered and not without medical controversy) criteria for being considered dead, they may take your organs – unless you have specifically opted out at an earlier point in your life.
Now, imagine the same logic applied to this problem: unless you have specifically opted out at an earlier point in your life, under certain conditions doctors may *presume* you consent to euthanasia. If it were a law, it would open up a lot of space for potential abuse, especially as euthanasia is more easily approved in a wider array of cases and on lesser grounds than it was originally intended (e.g. for psychological suffering alone).
Maybe I am just paranoid.
Anna:
I don’t think you’re just paranoid at all.
neo-neocon:
You’re right. I was thinking of another European story where “doctors” would assist killing patients with a low quality of life. However, this story is comparable to the Schiavo euthanasia and selective-child policy.
The process is purely progressive from conception to a premeditated death. Perhaps it is inevitable that quality of life will be prioritized over life. There seems to be a growing consensus to reject The Hippocratic Oath and similar moral standards (e.g. Judaeo-Christian).
The Death Treatment- When should people with a non-terminal illness be helped to die?
(via althouse.blogspot.com)
This story is also reported from Belgium. In fact, both stories probably have the same root, but are presented from different perspectives. The reported story: “The Death Treatment”, covers assisted suicide for people with low quality of life. I imagine that this perspective underlies the progress of pro-choice doctrine in liberal societies.
The Libertarian idiots said there would be no slippery slope. Were the idiots the fools or the ones who believed the fools?
People underestimate the power of the Leftist alliance, at their own risk.
Insanity:
Life: It’s not for me,’ says healthy 24-year-old Belgium scheduled to die by euthanasia this summer.