Saturday, October 1, 2016

Death Cult News

     Dear Holy Father Pope Francis: Inasmuch as you’ve been, ah, rewriting quite a lot of Christian doctrine, I must ask: Is “Thou shalt not kill” still in effect? You know, still binding? Or have you decreed a bunch of exceptions? Because we’re getting some “pushback” on it:

     Canada’s Supreme Court took democracy out of the death equation by conjuring a “right” to be made dead under very broad circumstances.

     Now, pressure is starting to force religiously-affiliated medical institutions and doctors to kill.

     After a Catholic hospital refused to euthanize a patient, who apparently received inadequate pain relief in the process of transfer, calls are being made to force Catholic and other faith institutions to commit what the Church considers a cardinal sin.

     Canada’s National Post reports on the keystone case:

     Ian Shearer had had enough of the pain and wanted a quick, peaceful end, his life marred by multiple afflictions.

     But the Vancouver man’s family says his last day alive became an excruciating ordeal after the Catholic-run hospital caring for him rebuffed his request for a doctor-assisted death, forcing him to transfer to another hospital.

     The combination of the cross-town trip and inadequate pain control left Shearer, 84, in agony through most of his final hours, says daughter Jan Lackie....

     Shearer’s experience at St. Paul’s Hospital highlights one of the thorniest issues concerning assisted death: the decision of most faith-based — but taxpayer-funded — health-care facilities to play no part in a practice made legal by the Supreme Court of Canada and federal legislation.

     [Emphasis added by FWP.]

     When the State pays the fiddler, the State calls the tune. That’s been established as “case law,” both in Canada and in the U.S., in a variety of settings. And so, in Canada’s “single payer” medical-care environment, the Canadian federal government can, if it so chooses, impose a legal requirement that Catholic hospitals kill its patients on request.

     The next question should be “On whose request?” What about patients who are, temporarily or otherwise, non compos mentis? And what about the “quality of life” opinions of governmental medical-care rationing commissions? To this point no one has addressed it openly, but you may be sure that the death cultists have been mulling it over.

     The Gentle Readers of Liberty’s Torch are surely bright and alert enough to see where this is headed. Why, a few of you are even Canadians, so I shan’t insult your intelligence by pressing it further. But American readers still uncertain about their choices in the upcoming election have some extra thinking to do.

     Just now, the Democrats in Congress are agitating for the transformation of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” a rolling disaster designed to be politically unworkable and financially unaffordable from the very first, into a Canadian-style single-payer system. Some of the advocates for such a system have even called for Medicare and Medicaid to be “integrated” into it, creating a single, no-escape system in which all life-or-death decisions would come under the purview of the federal government. And Hillary Rodham “I didn’t send or receive classified material on my gee-whiz / look-Ma homebrewed email server and anyway what difference at this point does it make?” Clinton is in favor of exactly that, as she established in 1993.

     Still think installing Donald Trump in the Oval Office is “too big a risk?” Think it over. Your life could depend on the answer. As for His Holiness’s opinion, I’ll let you know when he replies.


Anonymous said...

If you have any questions about how a gov't run 'healthcare' system would be run I strongly suggest you look up Ezekiel Emmanuel's reaper curve.

ZZMike said...

If something is a 'right', then surely government should provide it, free of charge (if at all possible). And if something is a 'right', then everyone should have it.

In some cases, whether they want it or not. And government will be happy to decide who needs it - as some may not be able to decide for themselves - as happened under the 'thousand-year reich'.