Skip to comments.Rick Santorum's 'Involuntary Euthanasia' Claim Outrages Dutch
Posted on 02/20/2012 4:56:52 PM PST by BarnacleCenturion
Rick Santorum's claim that the Netherlands advocates mass murder through involuntary euthanasia has prompted a furious backlash from the Western European country, with local news sources calling the Republican a "crazy extreme" candidate making up facts to stir up his political base.
"Rick Santorum Thinks He Knows the Netherlands: Murder of the Elderly on a Grand Scale" fumed the headline of the newspaper NRC Handelsblad on Saturday.
The article references an interview, barely played up by the American press, in which Santorum claims that euthanasia makes up "10 percent of all deaths" in the Netherlands," and that many of those people were essentially murdered by the state.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibtimes.com ...
I sure wouldn't check into any hospital that put a DNR on me as I checked in!
We can just see Mohammad Ali doing an advertisement for Dutch Hospitals: "They check in but they don't check out".
You must dig beyond the categorizations provided by the killer docs and look at what is going on. They are killing people because it suits them to do so.
BTW, Marguerite, REAL Jews are opposed to euthanasia.
Gingrich/ Adelson 2012!!!
Denial of service is involuntary euthanasia.
I never said otherwise.
What I did say is - what’s happening in Netherlands has no relevance whatsoever in the GOP primaries elections.
If it were, next you know Santorum would start blabbering about what happens in the other 191 countries in the world, one by one, providing the American public with the most powerful soporific ever.
Nazism spread from a small center in Germany ~ things like that ALWAYS get involved in our Presidential elections ~ we are concerned. PLUS, there’s this history. What goes on in the old homeland for millions of Americans (we got more Dutch than you got) is always of interest.
That is, their governments have all the power in the world to do whatever they wish at any time to anybody.
They simply do not read our rules in the sense that WE RESTRICT THE POWER OF THE STATE FIRST.
The Bill of Rights is a limitation on government, not individuals. The "religious test" clause is a restriction on the state, not private individuals, or people running for office, or even officers of state acting as individuals.
One of the errors made at the end of WWII was we did not FORCE all the European states we'd liberated to adopt a Bill of Rights before we cut them free of occupation.
Next time we'll fix that problem ~ in the meantime we just have to be patient with these people who not only don't understand our Constitution, they can't understand it. Europeans have no frame of reference for understanding it in fact!
Some health professionals seem to believe that the government should sponsor their efforts to counter the self-interested efforts of others (nutrition and diet quacks for example) because they are right and the others are wrong, because they are altruistic and the others are not. It may be true that they are factually correct and genuinely altruistic, and that what they wish to do will have a beneficial effect on many people, but it doesnt follow necessarily that the government should fund them.
This is a manifestation of a widespread phenomenon brought about by the advent of the secularized state. Instead of viewing the state as a limited means to a limited end, the tendency has been to imbue it, a temporal entity, with the attributes of a transcendent final judgment in which all injustices and inequalities are finally rectified. In this way, the secular state has been categorically, though not personally, deified and expected to act accordingly (something of a diffuse divine right of kings).
This is seen in those who believe the necessary response to a social ill is the passage of a law, especially a federal law, and the enactment of a program, especially one that they can devise and administrate (and that not necessarily for cynical reasons). Those who feel they are on the side of right, certain they arent acting against societys interest, often appeal to the State to aid them in their struggle against evil. Since the spirit of the secular state is money and power, they ask to be endowed accordingly. Its pathetically naive and dangerous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.