In Canada, the poor now qualify for medically assisted suicide.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
Euthanasia is not just for the sick. Canada will kill you if you're "too poor to live with dignity".

MAID (Medical Assistance In Dying), or euthanasia, has been around for a long time. If someone is living in terrible pain 24 hours a day, I totally understand why they would want an escape. I don't think anyone has the right to judge them. Until today, I hadn't heard of anyone being euthanized because they were poor. Now It looks as though the Canadian govt will be willing to cover the 2300 bucks it costs to kill someone. Not just the sick, but "those too poor to live with dignity".


The Canadian government will now pay for those who are “too poor to continue living with dignity” to kill themselves

This case is very sad:
� ��The government sees me as expendable trash, a complainer, useless and a pain in the a**," 'Sophia' said in a video filmed on Feb. 14, eight days before her death, and shared with CTV News by one of her friends.

Canada's Parliamentary Budget Officer published a report saying that the new guidelines for MAID (Bill C-7) would create additional net savings of $62 million per year to Canada's healthcare system, since assisted suicide only costs the taxpayer $2,327 per ‘case’.
The C-7 story. We'll save money.

And it goes beyond physical illness and poverty:
Psychiatric disorder? Let us kill you.

would they give you a 9mm pistol if you want to eat a bullet or will a doctor pull the trigger for you?

a reply to: ColeYounger

All planned right from the start. They planned the inflation, they planned the 'pandemic', they planned the restrictions on people's lives, they enjoyed the biggest wealth transfer to themselves , and they planned to 'depopulate' .
This is just part of their plan , what was it the acceptable number of 'useless eaters' , 500000 ?

a reply to: ColeYounger


…. and people judged Dr Kvorkian.

Abortion of adults for spurious reasons for 3.50...

Canuckistan , leading the satanic NWO ?

The third world becomes the first ..

and VICE versa .

a reply to: ColeYounger

The leaders of Canada responsible for this are going straight to hell, no if's and no but's.

They are obviously NOT Christian in any sense of the word whatsoever.

They are also a disgrace to there British and French founding fathers.

Basically they are TRASH for this, NAZI EUGENIC TRASH.

May God strike them from this earth, shame upon them, shame upon them.

a reply to: ColeYounger

This kind of stuff easily becomes a philosophical point about meaning, life and choice.

Why do people talk about 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life', when they should be saying 'pro-abortion' and 'anti-abortion'?

Because it's good, powerful rhetoric. There's no 'anti', because both groups want people to see them as good, 'pro'-something instead of 'anti'-something.

In any case, people call it 'pro-life' to force someone to live in this overpopulated world, and burden nature, animals and the whole planet, pollute the air we're supposed to be able to breathe with yet another destructive, droning leftist drug-user robot that probably will end up in jail anyway. How is that 'pro-life', when bringing another entity into this world only causes more painful animal murder and probably indirectly causes a lot of pain, misery and death anyway (even if only due to adding pollution by driving cars and such)?

For some reason, suicide is never considered 'pro-choice', though. It seems it's OK to force people to exist here, and to force to PROLONG their pain and misery, but it's never OK to prevent that from happening, or stop misery or pain.

An adult human being should always have the freedom to choose whether they do this or that thing, as long as it doesn't harm others or trample on other people's rights. Suicide doesn't harm anyone else (despite the people saying how it brings fried to 'loved ones' - think about people that HAVE no 'loved ones', though, and how SELFISH that grief is - why should we worry about people's grief that comes from selfish sources? It's like only considering inmates' selfish greed to keep someone in prison instead of being happy for the released prisoner for being free!)

I have always found Futurama's 'suicide booth' concept both funny and poignant; if this planet and its crazy societies and governments oppress people so much, they should AT LEAST provide a free, legitimate RELEASE from all this oppression as well. A suicide booth is a perfect concept, because it talks to so many levels of insanity and humanity at once.

On one hand, it's pretty callous for a society to be so inhumane that they would consider suicide such a casual thing that they can just easily provide booths for it - no concern or valuing of human life whatsoever.

On the other hand, the government is providing a necessary service for people that can't stand their misery and pain anymore, and lets them choose release. No one is forcing anyone to use those booths, but if you want OUT, you can do it.

It points out the hypocrisy of modern governments that write 'beautiful' speeches about murdering people (also civilian kids - they don't care) on the other side of the world for oil, while being completely against suicide (which is an expression of freedom of choice, ultimately), because 'human life has value'.

So while government pretty openly murders people,. at the same time it claims to value human life, so it does NOT provide desperate and pain-filed people with a much-needed RELEASE from this horrible nightmare world. It basically FORCES you to exist here, regardless of your consent!

To me, 'suicide' is an interesting thing, because the opponents and propopnents and their often hollow arguments say so much about humanity and existence, life and choice. I mean, can we really say we are FREE, if we don't have the freedom to END OUR EXISTENCE? (Not that suicide does that, sadly, but that's another point I want to make some day, how the Universe is oppressive because it keeps us in the state of existence even against our will - if I don't want to exist, I still have to!)

I mean, if we don't have the freedom to 'check out' because we have to follow someone ELSE'S values about 'human life', are we really free?

I think suicide booths would AT LEAST end some hypocrisy and the lack of them is a poignant proof of existing hypocrisy.

However, I also think suicide is wrong - people should be free to judge for themselves whether it's right or wrong, though - because there are karmic needs we are here to fulfill, and because it's a coward's way of out. It's aborting something you actually started and were determined to finish, and then chickened out.

You can't ESCAPE your karma, not even by suicide. So you might as well just endure it. You will have to incarnate again and again until you do anyway, so why try to escape it?

Also, there is a sort of 'punishment', or at least added karmic load from committing a suicide. There's SO much planning and designing that goes into every incarnation, there's so much energy required to build and grow a body, not to mention the toil of the parents and such, that it's just reckless insanity to just insantly throw it all way on a whim.

I read somewhere that you have to live a 'desperately lonely incarnation' after you commit a suicide, to counterbalance your wrongful deed. I don't know if this is true.

However, as suicide really doesn't solve anything, because you have to live your problems in another incarnation anyway (plus the added karmic load), I wouldn't recommend it, no matter how desperate your situation is. Your pain will serve your karmic and incarnational needs, it makes your life valuable.

Without pain and being able to pay karmic debts, your life would consist of insignifigant hedonism and hoarding and not much else, would it not?

How would it be valuable?

In any case, I am all for suicide booths and such, and I think this kind of governmental decision, as appalling as it may seem on the surface, goes a long way in eradicating hypocrisy at least, and showing their true colors. Human life has no value in capitalism, it's about time people learn that.

Also, appreciating and supporting human rights - including the right to end an incarnation - can only be a good thing.

It's interesting to note, that a government seems to define 'dignity' or 'dignified live' with MONEY. That tells you just how capitalistic this world is.

I suppose enlightened Zen masters that CHOOSE to live in poverty do not live a 'dignified life'? I'd rather live THAT 'indignity' than the microsoft-type wealthy pig's breakfast and having my snout in the trough in the ongoing gravy train.

Wealth opens many doors and opportunities, but money has a way of imprisoning the soul as well, and burdens the mind in such a way that it can't be as free as a careless poverty-ridden people's can.. when you have nothing to lose, you don't have to worry about things, and that's freedom.

Good.

People should have this right.

a reply to: Annee

It is not about RIGHT it is about forcing the POOR to DIE instead of helping them, it's about CLASS CLEANSING NAZI STYLE.

This is not about FREEDOM to commit suicide or to have some other poor sod do it for you but rather it is about creating a method to get rid or there society's poor by creating a mechanism through which they can be PURSUADED to get this 'HELP' (which is NOT for the poor sod being killed off but for the rich whom can then not pay taxes to help there poor) because they wont give them any other HELP.

You need to read up on the history of Eugenics and Euthanasia (Which was basically something they simply call Assisted suicide today).

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Annee

It is not about RIGHT it is about forcing the POOR to DIE instead of helping them, it's about CLASS CLEANSING NAZI STYLE.

This is not about FREEDOM to commit suicide or to have some other poor sod do it for you but rather it is about creating a method to get rid or there society's poor by creating a mechanism through which they can be PURSUADED to get this 'HELP' (which is NOT for the poor sod being killed off but for the rich whom can then not pay taxes to help there poor) because they wont give them any other HELP.

You need to read up on the history of Eugenics and Euthanasia (Which was basically something they simply call Assisted suicide today).

I doubt anyone is going to force the elderly to die.

At least not in this current generation.

In the future -- possibly.

a reply to: Annee

The elderly, well at least since the 1960's in the UK were I live the old have had substandard treatment in many hospitals, Doctors prioritize the young and healthy (They will deny it if asked but it's a fact though it also varies by county and by who your Doctor is though these day's the pressure from the no longer medically trained administers that run the hospital trusts as they have become is constant on doctors to cut costs and it costs to treat the elderly especially if they have chronic problems).

There are also political pressures against the useless poor and old, they are seen as a burden to the state and the Tory's have been prattling on about too many old folk's (Almost constantly until the Covid pandemic but they seem to have gone quiet about it at the moment probably because of all the scandals they are embroiled in) and an aging population (While withdrawing child allowance and support for parents who have too many kid's???) and calling them a burden to the state, hypocritical bunch those Tory's, if you are rich and old you get the best of everything but if you are working class and worked all your life hand to mouth they just want you to die off as you are then useless in there sight.

One nurse said they looked at patients toenails, if a patient was still fit enough to trim there toenails they would treat them but if the patient had poor toenails, well, fat is also a thing with some nurses and doctors refusing to treat obese people, nurses can't be lifting them in and out of bed especially when they are that heavy and will not endanger there own back's.

Best bet is to try to keep yourself well.

We all get old so it always comes home to those bastards that do this.

And I have met elderly people consigned to care homes by there family's terrifies of dying but surrounded by the dying and ignored by there kid's, some of them were fully compus mentas but lacked physical ability due to age and arthritis but still enjoyed there lives until there Kid's popped them into an old folk's home so they could sell there home out from under them.

Is there a direct source for this quote about the poor and dignity of life? I'm not finding anything...but I did read that next year March in Canada you can list a single mental health problem and become eligible for MAID, unlike now.

a reply to: Backagain

Apparently BY KILLING THEM now.

This is why I was and am against euthanasia. It never stays as a last resort to the terminally ill.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Annee

The elderly, well at least since the 1960's in the UK were I live the old have had substandard treatment in many hospitals, Doctors prioritize the young and healthy (They will deny it if asked but it's a fact though it also varies by county and by who your Doctor is though these day's the pressure from the no longer medically trained administers that run the hospital trusts as they have become is constant on doctors to cut costs and it costs to treat the elderly especially if they have chronic problems).

I'm 75. I don't support keeping elderly alive by machine.

I 100% support the right of euthanasia. A friend just spent about 2 months with his mom in hospice care at home. I see no point in suffering to die.

I've made my peace.

Hospitals should treat those who have a future.