Opinion

Opposing euthanasia is pro-life (a call to Massachusetts activists!)

I oppose abortion because I believe that every human being deserves to be treated with justice and respect, and that means honoring every human being’s right to life. This also means that I believe in being “whole life” – i.e., not just pro-life when it comes to the unborn, but pro-life when it comes to every stage of life, including the very old and the very sick.

That’s why I’m worried that the pro-life movement isn’t doing enough yet to oppose Question 2, which would legalize euthanasia (also known as physician-assisted suicide) in Massachusetts in some cases if voters approve it this November. We can expect to see more efforts like this one in the years ahead aimed at promoting early death for the elderly because the U.S. population is aging and health care is very expensive for the very old and very sick. That’s why it’s important that we stand up for the right to life for the elderly now, before harmful precedents are set which abuse and strip the elderly of their dignity and rights.

The main group opposing Question 2 is “No on 2″; you can check out their website HERE. Physicians for Compassionate Care also oppose euthanasia, as does the Catholic Church (and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference). There is also a website run by Massachusetts residents with disabilities who oppose Question 2.

There is hope that we can defeat this – Politico recently reported that Question 2 passing is “no sure thing”:

Massachusetts voters will decide in November if their state will be the third to allow physician-assisted suicide. A May poll found that 60 percent of registered Bay State voters back the idea across party lines. But Maine, California and Hawaii have all turned down proposals in the past, and Oregon voters rejected theirs before eventually approving it.

You can join the No on 2 Facebook page here and follow them on Twitter here.

Please pray, for the elderly and ill in Massachusetts, that their fellow citizens will vote this November to uphold their rights to be treated with respect and dignity, just as all human beings (born and unborn, sick and healthy) in Massachusetts and across the globe deserve to be treated!

And please join me in working to oppose euthanasia this November. Let’s get the word out to our friends and family in MA!

Live Action on Facebook

  • Pingback: Opposing Euthanasia Is Pro-Life (A Call to Massachusetts Activists!) | Live Action News | A mí, háblame en Cristiano

  • Philip D.

    freedom = choice. for you to try to undermine someone else’s end of life decision is to undermine the very essence of America. voting to take someone’s personal freedom of choice does not defend their dignity as you seem to believe, it is the exact opposite.

    as a nurse in a nursing home i see on a daily basis the amount of suffering that people like you force the elderly to endure. there is no dignity in forcing someone to starve to death over the course of a week because they can’t choose to end their life a few days earlier. you need to witness the suffering that your beliefs are forcing someone to endure before you get on your high horse and proclaim yourself as a defender of all humanity in the name of your god.

    in short, stop forcing your antiquated beliefs on a progressing society and start showing some real compassion. or even better, stay on your knees talking to yourself and i’ll actually work to make a difference in this world.

    • Kervy

      I can certainly understand your compassion for those who are suffering. My concern with this bill is that its provisions are ripe for abuse. The law is terribly written and may do more harm than good. For instance, two people must attest that the individual who wants to end his/her life is of sound mind – however, neither of them is required to be a doctor or psychiatrist. One of the two can even be a family member. I fear the possibility of a feeble-minded, confused grandma being pressured by a family member with something to gain – and there is no intervening medical authority to attest to the mental capacity of the individual.

      Additionally, the lethal means is a self-administered pill, that does not have to be taken under supervision of an MD. It is simply left with the patient. The patient may change his/her mind and still be left with the lethal drug at the bed side when the family member with something to gain enters the room…

      This post may sound overly alarmist, looking for a lethal conspiracy behind every bush – but the fact is that this lawmaking-by-referendum statute is very sloppily written. A well-intentioned law that is open to such possible abuse is not a good law. With someone’s life hanging in the balance, we need to make sure there is zero possibility of abuse. I think those who favor the general concept should give this particular attempt a pass.

  • Jerry K

    Thanks for your comment, Philip. I’m a hospice chaplain in Boston and many of my colleagues whom I admire deeply are proponents of Question 2 — for example, my friend Ron Hoffman, who runs an extraordinary organization for ALS patients and their families called Compassionate Caregivers. Ron is in the trenches every day — often seven days a week, nights, early mornings — providing loving care and support to those who suffering the affects of this horrific disease. While I am a Catholic who opposes physician assisted suicide, I think Ron has WAY MORE credibility on this issue than pro-life groups like LiveAction (or the great majority of Catholic bishops and moral theologians, for that matter.) While many of these groups pontificate from afar, they are not getting their hands dirty with the day-to-day lives of the elderly and terminally ill. But Ron walks the walks: he’s a man who does what Jesus did: extends compassion and healing to the sick and dying.

    From my perspective, the overlooked pro-life issue of our day is the way western developed countries ship our sick and elderly off to nursing homes to die, I visit dozens of nursing home facilities area every month, where I find scores of human beings who have essentially been abandoned to die by their loved ones. It’s a tragedy that will only escalate as the boomers retire, yet most people I know who proudly who call themselves “pro-life” aren’t talking about this issue at all, much less doing anything about it. People like Ron, on the other hand, are trying.

    • Philip D.

      i appreciate your reply, as well as the way you respectfully voiced your disagreements with me. (i reread my comment and i noticed i got kind of vitriolic in the end there. i mean no offense to anyone, i just get so riled up over this issue.)

      it sounds like Ron is the person i’m trying to follow in the footpaths of. it really irks me when people (such as the author of this article) spout talking points that they heard in church (and other various pro-life organizations) without realizing the full ramifications of their consequences. i sincerely doubt that Thomas Peters has met anyone who is facing the difficult choice of euthanasia for themselves. i doubt he has seen first hand the suffering that his convictions invoke.

      to write an article trying to persuade people to force this kind of suffering to take place (without even knowing what these people are going through on a daily basis) is abhorrent on par with torture. it is not showing them “respect and dignity” they deserve.

      i believe that for anyone to take a stance on this issue they MUST see the lives they are “defending” first hand. and then i challenge anyone to say that it would be wrong to end some of these lives 3 days early (if that is the patient’s wish).

      and equating abortion to euthanasia is ridiculous. these people already have a right to life–and nobody wants to take that away. what they need is the right to end their life if they so choose.

      if a person wants to (or even doesn’t want to) end their own life it is none of Thomas Peters business. it is between them, their family, and their doctor.

  • Philip D.

    i’m really wishing the author of this article would come here and state the reasons he believes what he does. his turning a cold shoulder to those who disagree implies A) he hadn’t thoroughly thought his position through and is now to shamed to return, or B) i was right in my assertion that he has absolutely no experience in this field in which he feels strongly enough about to try to maintain antiquated public policy, or C) is unwilling to engage in a meaningful debate with someone who vehemently disagrees with him… perhaps all three?

    • Kervy

      Or perhaps he simply hasn’t checked back to see if there are any comments.

  • Philip D.

    Don’t believe in your position enough to explain yourself Thomas?

  • Ashley

    Unfortunately prayer will not cure people dying of terminal illnesses. My father had ALS for over 2 1/2 years and chose to end his life. Should we have made him live a life of pain and suffering and simply prayed as he cried and no longer wanted to live? You’re ignorant, until you experience this first hand you have no idea. You must have no empathy for others, unfortunately that is not something you were blessed with.

  • Pingback: Assisted-Death Debate – blogs and news from around the world – August 2012 | Diane Goble