Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Considering the success in defeating bills that give doctors the right to prescribe suicide to their patients, the suicide lobby has been relentless in pushing their death ideology.
For instance, this year in Colorado, a Senate Committee defeated the assisted suicide bill on February 3, on February 4, then the House Judiciary Committee passed the assisted suicide bill (6 - 5) and on February 24, the sponsors "pulled the bill" because it lacked support.
Now the suicide lobby has introduced a Colorado ballot measure titled: "End of Life Options" for the November 2016 election. The suicide lobby will require almost 99,000 signatures to have this dangerous measure put on the ballot.
At the same time, the sponsor of the California assisted suicide bill, which does not become law until June 9, have introduced two bills to promote assisted suicide in California. The first bill would establish a toll free death line, while the second bill would require the state health plan to pay for assisted suicide.
Assisted suicide bills in New York and the District of Columbia remain as clear threats. While I whole heartedly thank the many concerned people who stopped the suicide lobby in their states, I recognize that we will need to be as relentless as the suicide lobby.
Even though the suicide lobby were defeated in Colorado, they are now bi-passing the legislative process with a ballot measure.
We need to be vocal about the dangers of assisted suicide and how giving doctors the right to prescribe suicide to their patients devalues the lives of people at a vulnerable time of their life.
We must protect people from assisted suicide, the future of our culture depends on it.
We must protect people from assisted suicide, the future of our culture depends on it.
2 comments:
Hi. Once upon a time, I clicked on a link that took me to a statistics website for pro-choice online petitioning, in favour of euthanasia and a whole bunch of other morally unethical options, and they'd stated a bunch of figures that seemed incorrect. These figures claimed that certain Christian denominations were such and such a percentage in favour of pro-choice options. I knew this was an inaccurately high percentage. Point being, that if pro-choicers are getting their statistics from online petitions, then these statistics - or votes - can be easily manipulated.
In the case where pro-choicers are compiling votes, I would, as opposition, seriously research and contend where these pro-choice organisers are fishing for these figures - from what sources - and ask to see the data.
Thanks.
F. Chips.
So bills are introduced, defeated, and re-introduced. And if they are withdrawn, then new bills are introduced again. If memory serves me right, in Canada, over a long period of time, there were no less than 23 attempts to impose euthanasia on Canadians. So, in short, when the euthanasia enthusiasts are told no, they try, try again. They are therefore **imposing their morality on the majority who keep saying no**. Isn't this predatory behaviour on a large scale? Does this not show that there is a certain social psychosis happening?
Post a Comment