Purposefully taking a human life used to be looked at with disdain from anyone with a conscience.
Society has now blurred the lines of morality so that people believe they have the “right to choose” which lives have value and which should be discarded.
Among the hall of shame in human history lies a piece of legislation so presumptuous and abhorrent that it could change the future of modern medicine and beyond.
Abortion is one of the biggest travesties we have ever encountered, and now a new demise spearheaded by liberals looks to diminish the innate value of a life given by God.
Alex Schadenberg is the Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, and he recently shared some devastating news on his blog.
Canada’s controversial euthanasia law, the euphemistic Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) law, required a person to be terminally ill before they could request to be killed by their physician, who is supposed to do no harm.
The Quebec Superior Court followed the majority voice of the progressive leaders and “struck down the requirement that a person be terminally ill before they qualify for euthanasia in Canada,” Schadenberg wrote on his website.
The Canadian Press reports:
“Quebec Superior Court has invalidated parts of the federal and Quebec laws on medically assisted dying laws, declaring them too restrictive and therefore unconstitutional.
A judge today found the “reasonably foreseeable natural death” requirement of the Criminal Code, which prevents some people from accessing medical assistance in dying, invalid.”
Concerns over the “restrictive” nature of the “Reasonably foreseeable natural death” requirement were brought up by Nicole Gladu and Jean Truchon who were distraught after their death requests were denied by doctors.
Both women suffer from degenerative diseases. It was argued by their lawyer that the law was “overly strict”, reports MSN.
Really?!?
Homicide by lethal injection should not be loosely applied. “Overly strict” requirements for assisted suicide are already a disgrace to the medical community.
The arguments by those in favor of such legislation say that living in pain is not really living, and that quality of life should be a gauge whether or not one should live at all.
It is truly sad when one’s quality of life is diminished by cancer, a degenerative disease, and any other ailment that can plague the human body, but that is not the value of an individual.
There is a 30 day period that the federal or Quebec government has to appeal the Quebec Superior Courts decision.
Dropping the requirement of a terminal illness for euthanasia opens up Pandora’s box when it comes to who should live and who should die.
If the decision stands, the government will likely extend lethal injection homicide for people with psychological reasons.
With about 300 million people suffering from depression worldwide, according to the World Health Organization, the repercussions of this legal precedent could mean the death of countless individuals who needed help, not irreversible harm.
A disability rights group is opposed to the courts decision and is encouraging the federal government to appeal.
Amy Hasbrouck, a member of the Not Dead Yet Group who advocated for the innate importance and value in disabled individuals, told CBS:
“Basically this decision is saying that as far as society’s concerned, it’s better to be dead than disabled.”
There should be more focus on improving the life of individuals with diseases and disabilities than on how to get them out of the way.
Euthanasia is not the answer.
While assisted suicide is illegal in most of the United States, there are still many states, including Maine in the coming year, that allow it.
Be vigilant in your stance for the value of all human life, before the legislators snowball lax liberal laws for all encompassing death sentences for many.
Please let us know in the comments section what you think about Canada’s new lax requirements and where that will take future legislation.