Tomorrow in Parliament
There is much that could be said about ‘assisted dying’ from a theological perspective, but that is almost superfluous so far as tomorrows debate goes - this is the kind of ethical rubicon where common sense and common decency should be sufficient for MPs to vote against the Bill. Helpful examples of this can be found in the following:
In the Spectator Dan Hitchens points out the callousness of much of the comment made by those who support assisted suicide and how the Assisted Dying Bill would encourage feelings of worthlessness in the elderly and disabled.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has argued clearly that if the Bill passes it will make the vulnerable more vulnerable, for example, here.
And the redoubtable Tanni Grey-Thompson argues here why the Bill is unsafe and unworkable.
The Bill is being brought forward from supposedly compassionate motives, yet the opinions expressed in these articles, plus many others, expose the fallacy of this ‘compassion’. When David Steel introduced the Abortion Act in 1967 I am sure he was well-intentioned, and his intentions were compassionate. I’m sure he never imagined that his Act would result in 200,000 abortions being performed in the UK each year, nor the kind of callousness the abortion industry would come to display. The Assisted Dying Bill might seem to be the very shallowest end of the euthanasia pool, but represents a line that once crossed would almost inevitably lead to a Belgian-like state of affairs. That is not the kind of society in which I want to live.
Contact your MP!