‘Aid in Dying Act’ based on faulty assumptions
Shortly after the Reproductive Health Act of New York passed I stated in Another Voice column that we need to ask Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo what lives are considered “viable?”
What “acts” might we look forward to next – state- mandated euthanasia for the elderly, chronically ill and people with mental health or physical disabilities? After all, this would “reduce costs.”
I stand corrected – Cuomo and his fellow cost-reducing legislative liberals and far left progressives are not proposing euthanasia legislation, rather yet another amendment “Act” – the Medical Aid in Dying Act.
Euthanasia is illegal, as it requires a physician to administer life-ending medications.
In physician assisted suicide or the Medical Aid in Dying Act the doctor provides the patient the prescriptions for life-ending medications to be self-administered.
Within the act a “terminal illness or condition means an incurable and irreversible illness or condition that has been medically confirmed and will, within reasonable medical judgment, produce death within six months.”
Dying has been medicalized and as a result is often prolonged. This creates a false perception that dying can be planned and precisely prognosticated.
Dr. David Hui, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Center, writes “the exact timing of death cannot be predicted with certainty.”
Over the past six decades, improved public health measures and medical advances have increased longevity and increased the incidence of life with chronic illness.
It could be reasonably argued that being of advanced age or any chronic illness might lead to inevitable death and that chronic illnesses include any physical and mental conditions.
End the life before it is born = reduced health care costs.
End the life before natural death = reduced health care costs.
We are in a battle of semantics!
We must undo damage from burning fossil fuels
Fossil fuels. We have been burning them for thousands of years. Do you want to do away with heat, air conditioning and automobiles? I don’t think so.
Then we have plastics. We have already gone too far. Landfills full of plastics don’t deteriorate. We have polluted the oceans and lakes. A minority recycle plastics.
What do we do? Fine the people who don’t. That would be the majority of people.
We have the brains but not the will. It will just go on until something breaks. Then the politicians will get excited. No pure water to drink. No clean air to breathe.
Now we’re going into the meat.
It would affect everybody. Millions will die. Are we awake now? Who is going to step forward?
We cannot stop burning fossil fuel or having plastic products. We must redirect our aims to undo the damage that they are doing.
Israeli voters have reason to be cautious, conservative
E.J. Dionne’s recent column on Israeli election results lacked context.
Israeli voters are more cautious and conservative because they have lived with the results of failed efforts for coexistence with the Palestinians.
The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 2, specifically requires a decennial census to provide information for reapportionment of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, which, by extension, also means providing information to redraw congressional district boundaries.
The constitutional purpose/goal of the census is therefore to determine the allocation of voting privileges that citizens have.
So why give non-citizens who themselves can’t vote, a representation in the voting process of our government?
The question about citizenship should never have been removed from the census in the first place.