Most people think that the Supreme Court of Canada 'legalized' assisted-suicide with its recent ruling this February. In fact, the justices with the 9-0 ruling did something more. As a result, this judge who had been convicted of his wife's murder, might actually be able to go free.
You see, what the Court actually did was strike down a section of the Criminal Code which read:
This means that it is now legal to use 'I did it because they wanted to die' as a defense. This is more than just legalizing Doctor-Assisted Suicide. It's the enactment of full-on euthanasia with the concomitant risk that people will be killed without their consent - with the legal blessings of the highest court in the land.
At the risk of being accused of being an alarmist, may I suggest that this is but the first 'step' on what will turn out to be a very slippery slope to enforced mortality.
Look at it like this:
a) In the 1930's, Canada enacted legislation that legalized and opened up the path to divorce. It was intended to be something available for extreme cases and was predicted to be very sparingly used in the country. 50 years later, we had no-fault divorce and a marriage failure rate approaching 50%.
b) In 1967/68 Pierre Elliot Trudeau, then the Canadian Justice Minister introduced legislation permitting the legalization of abortions under strict conditions, with guarantees and safeguards to ensure that abortions were legal but rare, only to be used in cases where the life and welfare of the mother were at risk. By the late 1980's all restrictions on abortion were swept away by the Supreme Court and now somewhere between 20 -30% of all pregnancies end in an abortion in North America. We are only now beginning to feel the effects of the demographic bomb that exploded with this ruling meaning that we have had to dramatically increase the rates of immigration into our country to ensure a growing workforce to pay for our social and pension programs.
c) In 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada removes the restriction in the Criminal Code which forbade the killing of another person who asked to have their life ended. A restriction is put in place stating that the death can be effected by a physician for a patient enduring 'intolerable suffering'. How long to do you think it will be before 'suffering' gets redefined into irrelevancy and wholesale euthanasia is practiced in our country? Given the progress of the other two great social innovations listed above, it should probably come to pass before the life of the last 'boomer' is snuffed out. I'd bet my life on it. Thanks to this misguided decision of the SCC, I'll probably have no choice but to participate in the death lottery that's coming.
If history is any form of teacher, we have good reason to be very, very afraid of what will most likely soon become common practice in our country.
Jacques Delisle, ex-judge convicted of wife's murder, says he didn't do it - Montreal - CBC News
You see, what the Court actually did was strike down a section of the Criminal Code which read:
No person is entitled to consent to have death inflicted on him, and such consent does not affect the criminal responsibility of any person by whom death may be inflicted on the person by whom consent is given.
This means that it is now legal to use 'I did it because they wanted to die' as a defense. This is more than just legalizing Doctor-Assisted Suicide. It's the enactment of full-on euthanasia with the concomitant risk that people will be killed without their consent - with the legal blessings of the highest court in the land.
At the risk of being accused of being an alarmist, may I suggest that this is but the first 'step' on what will turn out to be a very slippery slope to enforced mortality.
Look at it like this:
a) In the 1930's, Canada enacted legislation that legalized and opened up the path to divorce. It was intended to be something available for extreme cases and was predicted to be very sparingly used in the country. 50 years later, we had no-fault divorce and a marriage failure rate approaching 50%.
b) In 1967/68 Pierre Elliot Trudeau, then the Canadian Justice Minister introduced legislation permitting the legalization of abortions under strict conditions, with guarantees and safeguards to ensure that abortions were legal but rare, only to be used in cases where the life and welfare of the mother were at risk. By the late 1980's all restrictions on abortion were swept away by the Supreme Court and now somewhere between 20 -30% of all pregnancies end in an abortion in North America. We are only now beginning to feel the effects of the demographic bomb that exploded with this ruling meaning that we have had to dramatically increase the rates of immigration into our country to ensure a growing workforce to pay for our social and pension programs.
c) In 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada removes the restriction in the Criminal Code which forbade the killing of another person who asked to have their life ended. A restriction is put in place stating that the death can be effected by a physician for a patient enduring 'intolerable suffering'. How long to do you think it will be before 'suffering' gets redefined into irrelevancy and wholesale euthanasia is practiced in our country? Given the progress of the other two great social innovations listed above, it should probably come to pass before the life of the last 'boomer' is snuffed out. I'd bet my life on it. Thanks to this misguided decision of the SCC, I'll probably have no choice but to participate in the death lottery that's coming.
If history is any form of teacher, we have good reason to be very, very afraid of what will most likely soon become common practice in our country.
Jacques Delisle, ex-judge convicted of wife's murder, says he didn't do it - Montreal - CBC News
Comments
Post a Comment