NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

What is lost when we discard a sense of the sacredness of life

Apr 11, 2012

By Dave Andrusko

We have run dozens and dozens of articles at National Right to Life News Today about the ever-more-aggressive pro-euthanasia movement in Canada. As many wonderful pieces that we’ve included written by the likes of Margaret Somerville and Alexander Schadenberg, I think the reader will especially benefit from a column by Monique David that ran in yesterday’s Calgary Herald.

Her opening paragraphs in “When doctors and nurses become death’s servants” set the stage brilliantly. She writes

‘According to the newly released report, Dying with Dignity, co-signed by nine Quebec politicians, people are now ready to regard death through a new lens. We can free ourselves from a traditional ‘paternalistic’ relationship with our physicians in order to embrace a more informed attitude in facing suffering and end-of-life issues.

“Our values, the report says, have greatly evolved in the past 20 years; therefore, it is only normal that in our farewell to life, we should take a close look at a new option offered by the state. The report’s writers caution that although in the past Quebecers’ values were mainly rooted in religion, people who still hold to those principles should not impose them on others. We live in a secular society. The sacred view of life no longer applies as a civic value.”

I believe you will find her explication of the two conflicting definitions of “dignity” just riveting. The traditional view is that dignity is objective and “intrinsic to the human condition regardless of age, social state, religion, sex and condition,” David writes. The philosophical path followed in part two of the new report adopts the other definition of dignity—that is, it “is defined by and for the individual”—a.k.a. “autonomy” replaces the sacredness of human life as “the foundation of dignity.”

Talk about setting the stage. If autonomy is the “bright line” between a life with a dignity and one without, David warns “we are set to welcome euthanasia as the tool to provide us the autonomy people often lose at the end of their lives–it allows them to be released from their ‘undignified’ state.”

But as is always the case, words lose their meanings in order to hide what is being changed. Euthanasia=the act of killing? No longer, it is now “a medical act,” indeed an “act of compassion,” David writes. “Doctors and nurses, who were once life-affirming healers and carers, will now serve as facilitators of death.” But to become “death’s servants,” she explains, “they will be obliged to change their medical code of ethics.”

You will want to read her full essay so lets leave you with her powerful conclusion.

“By setting aside the concept of the sacredness of life, the mystery of life and death will quickly disappear from the horizon of many. Historically, humans have always been searching for meaning. By giving priority to the principle of autonomy as the decisive factor in how and when one wants to live and die, the complexity and mystery inherent in human life and who we each are is lost.

“Ultimately, it is the creative and powerful dimension of the human soul (for those who are religious), or the human spirit (for those who are secular) that legalizing euthanasia runs the risk of suffocating. And choosing to take control over life and death may turn out to be a boomerang. We could well lose any autonomy we gain.”

Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha

Categories: Assisted Suicide