From "Duo euthanasia: former Dutch prime minister dies hand in hand with his wife/Dries and Eugenie van Agt, both 93, died as number of couples in Netherlands choosing joint end to life grows" (The Guardian).
1. "Although still rare...." implies that we know where we're going and it will ultimately be routine.
2. It's a commitment beyond the marriage vow "'Til death do us part." Even death will not part them.
3. Makes me think of that Death Cab for Cutie song — "Love of mine, some day you will die/But I'll be close behind, I'll follow you into the dark..."
4. The claim is that the 2 who apply to depart together are evaluated independently, and their wish to journey together counts for nothing. Should it? A reason to say no is that it's hard to tell which way it should count. There could be too much charity or elevation of the other's interests over one's own. But perhaps that is part of self-definition. If you're allowing euthanasia — you've already gone this far — why deprive the individual of the spiritual aspect of the decision.
34 comments:
I saw a headline about that story and it made me think of the wives of dead pharaohs being entombed with them.
I, for one, do hope this catches on with Socialists, Commies and Nazis. A man can dream…
I told my wife I want to get back into flying after decades away, and buy a small airplane that we can use for adventures together in retirement, with the expectation that when we’ve both had enough of life we can point it out to sea and go out together in a beautiful Pacific sunset.
"If you're allowing euthanasia — you've already gone this far — "
This phrase is very telling. Some slopes are, in fact, quite slippery and ought to be treated with great caution, or avoided altogether. I'm not a religious person, but you'd have to be a fool to disregard some of their teachings. I'm talking about the sanctity of life, the primacy of marriage, that sort of thing. When I read CS Lewis, it makes me wish I could be a Christian because the morality of it all is unmistakable. I just can't get past the supernatural flummery.
I bet the World Economic Forum is 100% behind this.
As far as the "separate" evaluation for each spouse as to their need for euthanasia, what I immediately thought was, "What about each person's need for each other, as a companion and a care-giver?" Maybe one spouse wanted the euthanasia because they have a qualifying condition such as chronic pain, but then the other spouse said, "Well I depend on you for many of my needs, and I will have no companionship at all once you are gone and so I don't want to go on without you?"
"The claim is that the 2 who apply to depart together are evaluated independently, and their wish to journey together counts for nothing. "
The only thing I'm pretty sure of is that decision is between the two of them, and not any of my business.
Big Bullshit being passed off by the Depopulators as virtue. Suicide is a crime for good reason.
The Existentialists first told us suicide is the ultimate free will act. Now Big Brother is pushing it.
Youth in Asia for Elderly in Europe
It’s win-win.
"... why deprive the individual of the spiritual aspect of the decision."
I'm curious. What is the spiritual aspect of suicide?
Reposted under correct post…
Wonder if they go Dutch treat.
After reading the full UK Guardian article, I thought, good for them to have thought this through and were -- hopefully -- mentally aware enough to have made the decision themselves. Not for everyone, of course.
MAID to order!
Let's Just KILL ALL THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD!
Think how WONDERFUL life will be, once we are ALL Dead!
Just another reason for all the haters of Europeans that gather here to hate the Europeans more . . . as illogical as that sounds.
Tandem abortion.
Anyone who wants to kill themselves is free to do so. It isn't very difficult. Just keep the state and the medical establishment out of it.
"What is the spiritual aspect of suicide?"
Believing that your earthly life, as you understand it, is complete.
Seriously, They should just do like the Canadians with MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying)
Mental Illness (including Depression) will qualify you for Canadian MAID.
Suicidal Tendencies are considered a qualifying mental illness.
Of course, Right Now, MAID is on temporary hold, because they can't find enough doctors to process the cases.
But, SOON; ALL THE PEOPLE in Canada will have been helped on their way
Let’s make couples euthanasia “safe, legal, and rare”.
traditionalguy said...
The Existentialists first told us suicide is the ultimate free will act. Now Big Brother is pushing it.
This is where I've been at for years. Part of me wishes we could afford suffering and terminally ill people the same respect and compassion we give to our pets. But at the same time, there's just no doubt it will be thoroughly abused because of greed and politics and all the other crap things people use to be mean to one another.
This should be encouraged. It will kill off all the dumb people.
"Believing that your earthly life, as you understand it, is complete."
That is not your place to say unless you truly believe in nothing.
Well...they are more sophisticated than we are. I suspect my wife would not go for it. I'm not even sure how I'd open the conversation.
Me: "Honey. I've been thinking about how we are going to die and that maybe we should do it together at a time of our choosing."
Her: "No. You can go ahead and do this on your own. You know you love your independence, Honey."
Me: "But this would be romantic. An end of life holding of hands throughout eternity."
Her: "Not really my idea of romance. You just go on ahead. I'll meet you there later."
Me (talking to our dog): "I knew she wouldn't go for it."
The Dog: "Mmmphr...yawn. Pet me."
Off-topic but I wonder: why don’t we use euthanasia juice in our capital punishments? Presumably the euthanasia doctors advertise the procedure as “swift and painless;” they would never say “it’ll hurt like hell but get the job done,” right? Or maybe it is excruciating, cruel, and unusual but acceptable because it’s not punishment. It just seems like there’s a disconnect based completely on the concept of consent.
"...I will have no companionship at all once you are gone and so I don't want to go on without you?"
I think that is an early and common reaction to the grief of losing life's long term partner. It was mine when my wife of 50 years passed last year. After time I have come to the realization that I can go on and suicide during that initial and intense period of grief (unlike anything I have experienced, including the loss of a child) would be a huge mistake for myself and my family. While I think there can be benefits of assisted suicide it is indeed a slippery slope with many pitfalls.
Dual euthanasia, though not on my bucket list, is an intriguing concept. It was the subject of Lionel Shriver's 2021 novel "Should We Stay or Should We Go?"
The novel sets the characters and conflicts (a couple in their 60s agrees on dual euthanasia to be performed when they reach 80) in the first 100 pages. Then, we get about ten mutually exclusive scenarios to close the loop.
This is uncharted moral territory. There be dragons.
JR Marr… excellent suggestion!
Not that some pain involved in cap punishment is without merit.
Self-abortion is a choice. The question is if it should be normalized, discouraged, and/or subsidized through Medicare/ Medicaid/ Obamacares.
Euthanasia, eugenics, human rites are all modes of planned personhood under the Pro-Choice ethical religion in progressive "secular" sects.
I wonder if they get a volume discount!
The assisted death thing is tragic, because the death penalty protesters have told me that it is impossible to euthanize some one in a way that is not horribly painful.
I guess I don’t care about assisted suicide, except that once it gets going there will be a moral panic that once you are 70 or so it is your obligation to save the world by getting the f out of here you selfish jerk. That is the point where I will accept the hot summers and move back to Texas.
I remember being very disturbed by the joint suicide of Arthur Koestler and his wife, a much younger woman without health problems. I feel differently about a 93 year old couple, both with health issues, making a joint decision.
In India, the wife would be burned with the husband at the stake... pyre.
In the Aztec Empire, they would sacrifice virgins to mitigate climate change.
In liberal societies, they abort babies for social progress.
In progressive sects, they cannabilize profitable parts for medical progress.
In democratic nations, they relieve "burdens" in chanbers, in clinics.
Everything old is new again.
pas west replied to my comment:
"...I will have no companionship at all once you are gone and so I don't want to go on without you?"
I think that is an early and common reaction to the grief of losing life's long term partner. It was mine when my wife of 50 years passed last year. After time I have come to the realization that I can go on and suicide during that initial and intense period of grief (unlike anything I have experienced, including the loss of a child) would be a huge mistake for myself and my family. While I think there can be benefits of assisted suicide it is indeed a slippery slope with many pitfalls. }}}
My condolences on the loss of your wife. The deeper the love, the harder the loss. It's good to hear that you have found a way forward!
Whatever happened to a good old murder/suicide to end the couple's lives simultaneously? Does nobody who writes these crap articles watch any True Crime shows?
Post a Comment