President Obama himself has decried the use of “inconsequential treatment” for those near death. With assisted suicide becoming lawful, new government-ran health care and a society devaluing life by the minute, Peter Hitchens sees the future – anyone care for a side order of Soylent Green?
Aborted babies are slaughtered by the tens of thousands, solely because they are inconvenient to young, busy people.
Old, ill parents are also going to become a major nuisance to the same generation, very soon indeed. Baby boomers are all secretly terrified that mum or dad will end up wasting away slowly in a care home, rapidly consuming the inheritance.
How far we’ve come. The elderly were once our greatest gift. Wit, wisdom, guidance and the knowledge that they paved the way for the gift of ease we received in comparison. Leave it to the generation who took the most to throw them under the proverbial life bus.
In Britain, assisted suicide is becoming more prevalent. Hitchens sees it as no coincidence the more liberalizing of “death” is mirroring that of abortion laws, which essentially offered babies up to slaughter by the millions.
These hard cases and emotional scenes are the equivalent of the old argument for abortion, that if you didn’t fully legalise it people would go to dangerous amateurs and die horribly. In fact, abortion in dire cases was legalised in 1938 after the famous trial of Dr Aleck Bourne, but that law didn’t offer a free pass to anyone who claimed vaguely that their mental health would be at risk if they carried the baby to term. It required serious evidence.
And as soon as it was replaced by a more liberal law, the present annual massacre began, and continued to grow. The same will happen to the old and unwanted. It will start with a few dozen annual trips to Zurich, urged on by ‘compassionate’ relatives and complaisant doctors. It will end with our hospitals switching on the morphine pump earlier and earlier.
Obama intends to keep his finger firmly pressed on the button.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
I expect to see this sort of thing happen more and more. And the only consolation will be watching as the Baby Boomers (and I am one) gradually realize it’s their turn next.
“Abort the elderly?”
Can we start with everyone in Congress who’s over 65 setting an example?
Phew! I thought you got me there, Raoul.
Whole new meaning to “term limit” — love it, Raoul!
I’d start to worry that, with that kind of limit, the Young’uns running Congress might mandate Carousel.
Soylent Green was needed because the world was over-populated and polluted such that real food was scarce and incredibly expensive. The way we’re going there will be plenty of food around, but no one to eat it.
And what are liberal policies without “bread gobblers” to oppress?
Some way or another libs always shoot themselves in the foot. As in all the taxes and Social Security 50 million or so dead babies would have paid if they had lived. Somewhere along the line, they most likely murdered the one who’d have grown up to have developed a definitive cancer cure.
+JMJ+
I had a friend in uni whom I suppose I’d call “liberal” except that we were in an entirely different political context from what exists in the States. She was effectively pro-abortion, and during one of our
debatesdiscussions she said that she didn’t see how something the majority of the people wanted could be denied by their elected representatives. So I pointed out that pro-abortion people are more likely to have less children than pro-life people, and also more likely to euthanise themselves or their parents. In a generation or so, the former will have made themselves the minority, anyway, and then where would their “strength in numbers” be?