Posted on 07/15/2026 8:54:41 PM PDT by Morgana
I have very bad news for everyone who opposes killing people.
France’s National Assembly passed their euthanasia bill by a vote of 291 to 241 on Wednesday, July 15. We reported on June 30 that France’s National Assembly voted to pass the euthanasia bill by a vote of 295 to 232. France’s Senate has defeated the euthanasia bill three times after the previous votes. This final vote will not go to the Senate for a vote as the National Assembly can pass legislation into law even when they are not able to reach agreement with the Senate.
The issue might not be over yet.
Sylvie Corbet reported for The Associated Press on July 15 that the Prime Minister and the Senate President will refer the bill to the Constitutional Council. Corbet wrote:
Senate President Gérard Larcher and Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu said they will refer the bill, once adopted, to the Constitutional Council, which will have up to a month to determine whether it complies with the Constitution. The law would only enter into force once that review has been completed.
President Emmanuel Macron and the President of the National Assembly, Yaël Braun-Pivet both support legalizing euthanasia and they have pressured members of the National Assembly to support it. Similar to Canada, France’s bill legalizes both euthanasia and assisted suicide. The Canadian data indicates that nearly every assisted death was the doctor administering the poison (euthanasia) rather than the person self-administering the poison (assisted suicide). Also, like Canada, France’s healthcare system will cover the cost of killing.
France’s euthanasia bill has been sold to the public as having “strict” safeguards. The truth is that this bill does not limit the killing to exceptional circumstances. This laws employs undefined language that is designed to approve the killing of people by medical staff that have been given legal immunity from prosecution.
France’s bill states that the person is limited to – Adults who are French citizens or long-term residents suffering from an incurable and grave illness in an advanced or terminal stage, facing constant, intolerable physical or psychological pain
What does it mean to be suffering from a grave illness? Or to be in an advanced or terminal stage? Or to be facing constant intolerable physical suffering? Or psychological suffering?
Is it possible to determine who is suffering from intolerable physical or psychological suffering? Suffering is personal and subjective. Psychological suffering is real, but is it irremediable?
France’s bill suggests that people will be expected to self-administer the lethal substance (assisted suicide). However, if a medical professional confirms the person is physically incapable of doing so, a doctor or nurse can administer it for them (euthanasia).
This is different than Canada’s law but if passed, the law will be forced to expand since i is easier for a doctor or nurse to administer the lethal poison than for a person to self-administer the poison.
France’s bill suggests that a medical team (including at least two doctors or a nurse) must verify the patient’s condition and free will.
Having two doctors or a nurse verify a patient’s condition is not a “safeguard.” In every jurisdiction, there are medical staff who are willing to kill patients who will approve patients for killing and they will work with like minded medical staff to approve the killing. In other words, this system provides little effective oversight of the law.
Patients will “doctor shop.” Some medical staff who are willing to kill will interpret the law more widely than others. Some medical staff will not approve killing people under certain circumstances while others will be happy to do so.
France’s bill states that medical professionals are not required to participate in the act of killing but they are required to refer patients to medical staff who are willing to arrange the killing. This means that medical professionals who oppose killing must be complicit in the act.
Further to that, medical institutions are required to participate and allow patients to be killed. This provision will force some medical institutions to close. We hope that the Constitutional Council will reject the euthanasia bill. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition opposes killing people. We oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide and we support caring options.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
With the French, the question is where to start?
Point well taken, France has been killing themselves for decades now.
Natural birth and natural death. If a doctor or a nurse helps a patient to end his life, then the doctor or nurse will be active participants in a murder which is Commandment number 5. “Thou shalt not kill,” says God. France needs to wake up.
Let them eat cake.
Passes Bill
.Legalizing Euthanasia.
Devaluing Human Life
It’s long been obvious that the French have no spine or moral values. They turned over countless Jews to the Nazis, and today let countless muzzlimes into their country in surrender. So the next step is allowing euthanasia. Will they care who’s pulling the plug?
How much do you have to pay to let the government murder you? Is there a cheaper, more efficient way to end your life and cut out the BIG GOV middleman?
Will this blessing of the citizens be liberally applied by the painless engine of Liberty, Égalité, Fraternité (guillotine)?
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.