Skip to comments.80% of New Zealand Residents Did Not Understand They Were Voting to Euthanize People
Posted on 12/27/2020 5:02:49 AM PST by xomething
Polling suggests that 80% of those who voted in October’s assisted suicide referendum in New Zealand misunderstood what the law would actually do.
In October, the ‘End of Life Choice Act’ became law through a binding referendum where 65.2% of voters supported the Act. However, according to group Euthanasia-Free NZ “Polling during the advance voting period showed that 80% of New Zealand adults were misunderstanding what the End of Life Choice Act would legalise”.
“Only 20% of respondents knew that this Act would not make it legal to turn off machines that are keeping people alive”. [emphasis original]
Executive Officer of Euthanasia-Free NZ, Renée Joubert, said: “It seems that most New Zealanders voted for an end-of-life choice that is in fact already legal”.
As in the UK, in New Zealand, it is lawful to turn off a machine that is keeping someone alive artificially when in consultation with a doctor and where it is deemed medically appropriate. Polling suggests however that this was not widely known and 80% believed that the ‘End of Life Choice Act’ was making an end of life decision legal that was in fact already legal.
The majority of voters didn’t know what they were voting for
Furthermore, only 35% of people knew that this Act would make euthanasia available to terminally ill people even if they were not suffering any physical pain.
Only 29% of those surveyed were aware that terminally people who met all the eligibility criteria for an assisted suicide but also had depression or some other mental illness, would be permitted to end their life under this Act.
Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!
Unlike assisted suicide and euthanasia laws in Australia, Canada and the U.S. New Zealand’s new law does not require that there be an independent witness when a person signs their euthanasia request. However, only 13% of people surveyed were aware of this fact.
“The New Zealand Parliament voted down 111 out of 114 amendments that could have made this law safer,” says Ms Joubert. “Many amendments were rejected without even being debated. Two of the passed amendments were solely about the referendum”.
“At least Parliament could have included the safeguards that have been standard requirements in US assisted dying laws for the past 22 years”.
“It’s disappointing that the New Zealand public were generally uninformed about the details of the End of Life Choice Act”.
Expanding euthanasia law
In what appears to be a pattern, across numerous jurisdictions which have introduced assisted suicide and/or euthanasia laws, overtime the legislation has gradually become more permissive as whatever safeguards were inserted into the law are eroded by doctors and activists.
Belgium legalised euthanasia in 2002, and since then the practise has even been extended to children. The current law allows euthanasia if the patient is in a state of constant physical or psychological pain.
There is now a renewed push for euthanasia to be available for those who are healthy but have decided they have a “fulfilled life”.
The Netherlands too legalised euthanasia in 2002. Since then law has expanded to allow euthanasia for Dutch babies up to 12 months. Children between 12 and 16 can be euthanised with the approval of their parents.
Right To Life UK spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said: “The results of this polling are deeply disturbing. They indicate that the majority of people who voted in favour of the ‘End of Life Choice Act’ has little idea of the scope of this euthanasia law. Unfortunately, it seems likely that many people will only discover just how terrible and far-reaching this law is when they run up against it within their own families”.
LifeNews Note: Republished with permission from Right to Life UK.
Same with (s) electing (?) buyDUNG/harris.
That is why you get 5,300 page bills placed on their desks 2 hours before the vote.
I wuz jus following orders ALERT
I believe this. Referendums and bills are purposely worded or titled to get the citizen to believe something other than the truth.
A classic is the Affordable Care Act where you get to keep your own doctor and it will be cheaper. And they congress critters had to vote for it before they could read it. Once something like this becomes law you’ll never get rid of it.
Certainly this crap goes on in other countries.
The left talks of a great reset. I think there should be one. One where the left world wide is totally destroyed.
It’s difficult for me to believe that no organization in New Zealand took it upon themselves to tell the ignorant people the consequences of approving this proposed law.
“That is why you get 5,300 page bills placed on their desks 2 hours before the vote.”
The ACA (obama care) was the same. Had to vote for it before you could read it. There’s something seriously wrong with our system if such a bill is so long and filled with so much mindless unrelated pork and the lawmakers are expected to vote for it without reading it. Somewhere some how this is or should be illegal. They are not representing the public.
How much media do they control?
New Zealand also has an official censor.
If most of the media is in the control of the same group who favored the bill, how do you get the word out?
Consider our situation in the U.S., with a First Amendment.
Considerably less press freedom in New Zealand.
When government makes it legal to kill innocent people, it is moral, right and required to assassinate government officials at any opportunity that presents itself until the practice stops.
> If most of the media is in the control of the same group who favored the bill, how do you get the word out?
Just like Roe V Wade is completely misinformation as to what it truly means... basically ushering a birth and abortion tax etc... disallowing people actual responsibility in their own privacy.
Roe v Wade has been the biggest invasion of privacy in the oxymoronic name of privacy , and the proof is they condemn the “abortion alley” concept - not because it is unsanitary and dangerous but because private.
Some Indian tribes had long had women perform abortion on their own selves to teach women how to do it themselves without the husband knowing. Now this business has been territorialized by actual mafia pimps and government enabling these pimp terrorists’ territory in women (Planned Parenthood).
Euthanasia and death panels of “expert doctors” are what they seek while they will blame guns for independent suicide.
Note to NZ’s seniors: You’re the ones in the crosshairs. Threaten to disinherit your kids if they don’t repeal this ASAP.
Pay special attention to the bit about the "national frailty score".
Let's hear it for socialized medicine.
It is all about control.
They take the guns away to prevent PRIVATE suicide, but usher Euthanasia so that PUBLIC government/doctor-elite-assisted controled suicide is enacted. It is all about control of speech and money and the soul of people.
Gulag archipellago has now a social media society of control dimension instead of the usual disciplne system based on concentrating people in baraks.
The concentration camp is done in the virtual via teleworking tax and what not.
80 percent of new Zealanders are euthanized and they dont now it, ha!
Evidence here that there’s an active gaslight media in NZ too, given that people didn’t even know what they were actually voting for.
Apparently media organizations around the world are chartered to misinform.
Satan is a global Satan not only in American public schools
Leftists love uneducated voters.
Too late now. Once people give up their right to stay alive, it’s gone. Those who object to euthanization will be euthanized.
So you are telling me that murdering innocent people isn’t the peak of a wonderful. advanced society? Who knew???
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.