• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

religious liberty and religious freedom news

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
Home » Washington State – Faith-based groups taking crucial role in Euthanasia initiative battle

Washington State – Faith-based groups taking crucial role in Euthanasia initiative battle

October 13, 2008 by ReligiousLiberty.TV

 

It is compassionate or controlling, a choice or a conspiracy.

On their respective Web sites, the campaigns for and against Initiative
1000 include point-by-point attempts to debunk the other side in the
debate over physician-assisted suicide, the contentious end-of-life
issue facing Washington voters in the general election.

Most of the arguments relate to the adequacy of safeguards in the
measure, which would allow physicians to prescribe lethal doses of
medication if requested by terminally ill patients.

But after dealing with coercion, mental illness, insurance companies,
family notification, physician oaths and other matters, both sides end
their lists by addressing religion.

To contend that giving a terminally ill patient more control over the
dying process is "playing God" -- or is "against God's will" -- is
simply a myth, says Yes on 1000, which prefers to call the initiative
"death with dignity."

The Coalition Against Assisted Suicide disputes the assertion of
supporters that the "only real opposition comes from religious groups."

Still, faith-based groups or individuals are playing a crucial role on
both sides of the battle to make Washington the second state, after
Oregon, to allow physicians to legally prescribe deadly medication --
hardly surprising, since the issue deals with literal matters of life
and death.
Read more at http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/383018_suicidefaith13.html

Filed Under: Current Events, Human Life, Human Rights, Politics, Religion, Top Story Tagged With: death with dignity, end-of-life, euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, suicide

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Kevin James says

    October 15, 2008 at 12:02 pm

    It’s not surprising that religious groups are the opposition. Religion, good religion, is a promoter of life and the high view of human dignity. It is understandable as to why church groups in America,namely those from the Judeo-Christian faith, would fight against the bill. The whole question of doctor assisted suicide is a wrenching one.

    Oregon has shown that such a law over is decade old existence has not produced mass death to the terminally ill. The majority of those that choose doctor assisted death and are cleared for it, don’t even use it. What studies have shown is that it is an issue of personal dignity and control over one’s end of days that is really a driving force behind this measure.

    It would be most interesting to hear of what faith or non faith a person who chooses assisted suicide and follows through with it and how active they were in their belief. That could shed a whole new dimension on the current debate.

    Truely assisted suicide has its potential problems and it must continue to be debated, reviewed and strickly managed so that a person’s final wishes are indeed honored as best as can be within the law and ethics. The argument is over dignity and how best to preserve and promote it. May both sides of the issue preserve that in their fight for or against the measure.

  2. Kevin James says

    October 15, 2008 at 5:02 am

    It’s not surprising that religious groups are the opposition. Religion, good religion, is a promoter of life and the high view of human dignity. It is understandable as to why church groups in America,namely those from the Judeo-Christian faith, would fight against the bill. The whole question of doctor assisted suicide is a wrenching one.

    Oregon has shown that such a law over is decade old existence has not produced mass death to the terminally ill. The majority of those that choose doctor assisted death and are cleared for it, don’t even use it. What studies have shown is that it is an issue of personal dignity and control over one’s end of days that is really a driving force behind this measure.

    It would be most interesting to hear of what faith or non faith a person who chooses assisted suicide and follows through with it and how active they were in their belief. That could shed a whole new dimension on the current debate.

    Truely assisted suicide has its potential problems and it must continue to be debated, reviewed and strickly managed so that a person’s final wishes are indeed honored as best as can be within the law and ethics. The argument is over dignity and how best to preserve and promote it. May both sides of the issue preserve that in their fight for or against the measure.

  3. albert michael lapoint says

    October 18, 2008 at 1:08 am

    just the beginning of the morals
    breakdown in America. sadly this
    will escalate as americans standard of living drops.

  4. albert michael lapoint says

    October 17, 2008 at 6:08 pm

    just the beginning of the morals
    breakdown in America. sadly this
    will escalate as americans standard of living drops.

Primary Sidebar

Geneva, Switzerland - December 03, 2019: World Health Organization (WHO / OMS) Headquarters - DepositPhotos.com

Biden admin could hand over US control of health emergencies to WHO next week

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The ultimate control over America’s health care and its national sovereignty will be put up for a vote next week at a meeting of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).  On May 22-28, 2022, the 75th World Health Assembly will convene at the United Nations […]

Statement on the Leak in Dobbs

The leak was intended to disrupt the processing of the decision and we are not going to dignify the leak or the unidentified leaker by analyzing it prematurely. As a constitutional republic we cannot go down that road without doing severe damage to the institution of the Supreme Court where there must be professional courtesy between the justices and their staffs.

Boston City Hall - photo from Supreme Court Opinion

Supreme Court rules 9-0 that Boston violated 1st Amendment in refusing Christian flag at City Hall

This morning the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Shurtleff v. Boston (Dec’d 5/2/2022) that the city of Boston violated the free speech rights of a Christian group when it refused to allow them to participate in a city flag raising program.

Active Liberty - a survey of Justice Stephen Breyer's religion clause jurisprudence - Supreme Court

Active Liberty: A Survey of Justice Stephen Breyer’s Religion Clause Decisions

A comprehensive review of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer’s decisions in Free Exercise and Establishment Clause cases.

Canadian gov’t calculates that expansion of assisted suicide will save taxpayers millions of dollars

In Canada, it is easier for the disabled who do not suffer terminal illness to get approval for assisted suicide than approval for affordable housing. The government has calculated the cost of providing healthcare versus providing assisted suicide.

Random Quote

Everyone claims to be okay with freedom of religion, but the moment you mention God there is a strange tension that fills the air. If there was a 6th sense, that would be it.

— Criss Jami

Get the ReligiousLiberty.TV Newsletter!

Comes out a couple of times a month. Unsubscribe anytime automatically, no questions asked.
* = required field
unsubscribe from list

powered by MailChimp!

Copyright © 2022 Founders' First Freedom is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
0
0
0
0