|
Contributor
Ray
Haynes
Mr.
Haynes is an Assembly member representing Riverside and
Temecula.
He serves on the Appropriations and Budget Committees. [go to
Assembly Member Haynes
website at California Assembly][go to Haynes index]
 Let’s
Kill All The Old People
Liberal
Sacramento’s suicide solution…
[Ray
Haynes] 3/8/05
I have to
give my left-wing friends some credit. They are really good
at making
up touchy-feely names for some really bad ideas.
Whether it is “contributions” as a word for tax increases,
or “protection of the environment” to justify complete
and total control over your property and business, or “investments” for
out of control government spending (e.g. “I want to invest
in our schools for our children” is another way of saying “I
want to steal your money, give it to the teachers’ union
bosses, who will then give it back to me, so I can stay in power,
and use the kids as the excuse for the whole scheme.”),
the lefties in this country can come up with really pretty sounding
titles for extremely dangerous concepts.
Take the so-called “Death with Dignity” idea being
tossed around California these days and introduced into our legislature
as AB 654. The lefties sell it as a “compassionate” means
of dealing with “end of life” decisions. People should
be left with the “choice” to bring a “swift
and painless” end to a “full and complete life.” It
is a “courageous” choice, which should be “overseen” by
a “licensed professional” who will fully evaluate
whether the person who wants this “humane” end to
his or her “tortured existence” is competent to reach
this very “personal and emotional” decision.
For all the pretty
words, “death with dignity” is
just a nice way of saying we just wish the old, the disabled,
the mentally ill, or anyone with more than normal problems would
just spare us all the trouble and kill themselves. We’ll
give them the pills, we’ll find them a doctor who will
convince them they would be better off dead, and then we’ll
make sure they off themselves quickly and painlessly.
Everywhere it has
been authorized; this form of “voluntary
euthanasia” has turned houses of healing into killing fields.
In the Netherlands, many of the aged and/or infirm will not go
into a hospital out of fear that the doctors in those hospitals
will order their deaths. In Oregon, in the two short years that
their “compassionate” statute has been in effect,
there have been five documented cases of people who died under
suspicious circumstances using this statute.
About 30 years ago,
a court held, in the case of Karen Ann Quinlan, that medical
care could be withheld from a comatose
patient. Twenty years ago, a court held that food and water are
medical treatment, and a person can refuse that treatment if
he or she is mentally competent. Today, we have hospitals and
hospices essentially requiring people to terminate food and water “treatments” on
the grounds that helping some people would just be futile (read “too
expensive” in the era of managed care). What was once an “individual
choice” has turned into a medical mandate requiring the
old and the infirm to forego treatment that can alleviate or
cure the symptoms of a disease.
In 1933, Joseph Goebbels
produced a movie in Nazi Germany extolling the virtues of “death with dignity.” Six years later,
in the midst of the war, to “save money” the German
government built a number of gas chambers which were then used
to euthanize the physically and mentally disabled. Three years
after that, those same gas chambers were used to solve the “Jewish” problem
in Germany. Our country has rejected euthanasia and “death
with dignity” for the last 70 years for a reason. History
has taught us that these concepts have been used by governments
throughout this world to justify the most horrible injustices
that people have ever visited upon their fellow human beings.
It is always sold as an instrument of freedom, and it always
ends of as a tool of terror. CRO
§
|
