Replies

"This decision takes power FROM the government and gives it TO the individual."

Actually, it does no such thing. The decision says that the federal controlled-substances statute does not authorize the Attorney General to determine what uses of federally controlled substances are allowed. As the posted article provides, Congress could pass a new law making it clear that federal controlled substances may not be used for assisted suicide. See my post #654.

But it is also wrong for you to claim that Oregon's law merely gives the decision of taking one's life to the person himself. First of all, our lives belong to God, and are not ours to take. And second, even if you don't believe in God, you need to keep in mind that euthenasia often involves an old and infirm person from whom it is very difficult to obtain informed consent. Oregon is delegating to doctors the authority to determine whether a person wants to commit suicide and allowing the doctor to kill such person. As we have already seen in The Netherlands, this creates immense pressure on the infirm to "consent" to being murdered, since they don't want to be a burden on their relatives or the government. There is no guarantee that the person being murdered really wanted to die at the moment he or she was getting injected with deadly substances.

Because an old person in the Netherlands may or may not be able to handle the responsibility of managing their own lives, I shouldn't be able to control my own life?

I'm sorry, but if you want a nanny state that controls every aspect of your life, move somewhere else. Don't work against those of us fighting for a limited government here in the U.S.

If you don't feel up to the challenge of being in charge of your own life and you absolutely must have someone telling you to what to do, fine, I'll send you a detailed set of instructions. However, I wish you would leave the rest of us that CAN run our own lives alone for God's sake.