..................................................
Today Hot Air reveals that top British moral philosopher, Baroness Warnock, thinks that the government should license senile people to be "put down" so they can stop being a drain on society.
The veteran Government adviser said pensioners in mental decline are “wasting people’s lives” because of the care they require and should be allowed to opt for euthanasia even if they are not in pain.
She insisted there was “nothing wrong” with people being helped to die for the sake of their loved ones or society.
The 84-year-old added that she hoped people will soon be “licensed to put others down” if they are unable to look after themselves. …
Lady Warnock said: “If you’re demented, you’re wasting people’s lives – your family’s lives – and you’re wasting the resources of the National Health Service.
“I’m absolutely, fully in agreement with the argument that if pain is insufferable, then someone should be given help to die, but I feel there’s a wider argument that if somebody absolutely, desperately wants to die because they’re a burden to their family, or the state, then I think they too should be allowed to die.
“Actually I’ve just written an article called ‘A Duty to Die?’ for a Norwegian periodical. I wrote it really suggesting that there’s nothing wrong with feeling you ought to do so for the sake of others as well as yourself.”
Sure, let's go back to the days of Nazi Germany when the handicapped, disabled, senile and all those over the age of at least 70 can be disposed of. After all, these segments of society are not actually contributing any benefits, are they?
Why not push this "right to die" belief and extend it to those who are unable to make the decisions for themselves, especially if they lack the cognitive ability. This right to die belief could then be called "must die" and could be implemented for all senile patients. After all, those people with Alzheimer's should be willing to sacrifice their life and not be such a burden on their families, whether they are sane enough to realize how worthless they are or not.
Neil Hunt, who is the chief executive of the Alzheimer's Society in Britain, stated: "I am shocked and amazed that Baroness Warnock could disregard the value of the lives of people with dementia so callously."
Sadly enough, these statements are not shocking at all to me in this day and time. The belief in the sanctity of human life has gradually been chipped away in the U.S. The beginning of the end of our belief in this sanctity started with Roe v. Wade in 1973 which has resulted in millions of babies being murdered over the last thirty-five years. Additionally, euthanasia is now regarded as perfectly acceptable and in fact favored - people should have the "right to die." As a nation we stood by and watched while Terri Schiavo was starved to death because her husband, who already had a family by another woman, conveniently said Terri would have wanted it that way.
I am reminded of an article I read just this week by Dr. Allan Carlson. The article is entitled "Death Wish II: Euthanasia, the Second Time Around" and talks about the similarities of the "mercy killing" movement in the U.S. (and other countries) and the Germany of 1920.
The same impulse emerged in Germany as well. In 1920, the prominent jurist Karl Binding and the distinguished psychiatrist Alfred Hoch published a book entitled (in translation) The Release of Life Devoid of Value. The volume described those "absolutely worthless human beings" held in psychiatric institutions and asylums for the retarded who had "neither the will to live or die" and "whose death is urgently necessary." The book labeled these poor souls a vast army of "ballast existences," outlined how a euthanasia program could be organized, and emphasized the financial economies to be gained.
These views, I hasten to add, were not those of cranks or cruel thugs. These judges, doctors, and scientists were leaders in their fields, progressives, self-styled "modernists," who sought to apply the successful techniques of industry and the values of efficiency and cost-accounting to questions of healing, life, and death. They rejected the old, "discredited" Christian principle of "the sanctity of human life" in favor of a rational measure of utility, and a readiness to relieve suffering at any cost.
You may read Carlson's entire article here.
Do you notice any similarities in the statements of Baroness Warnock and those of Binding and Hock? Their beliefs are eerily similar; they all believe "worthless human beings" or "senile people" should be dealt with, stating these people's deaths are "urgently necessary" and they should be "helped to die."
In any society, the value of all human life is degraded when killing some members of that society is seen a positive thing and is called necessary for the good of the public. If the "right to die" does exist in the U.S., and it certainly does, how far away are we from the "license to kill" policy which Baroness Warnock speaks of above?
Put the Senile Out of Their Misery
8mm
