Euthanasia in Canada, Supreme Court Ruled this Morning

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Kimmio said:
I think the Supreme Court decision forced ideals on me that I can't accept unless we are able to craft laws that reflect the other side of this too.
Click to expand...
the Supreme Court decision forced nothing on you ... your ideals are your ideals ... when has any law crafted really ever changed your life one iota. What if you were not made aware of this ruling by the courts ... would you be out there in the public forum fighting for a drafting or crafting or whatever more laws ... this is not a duty to die law ... yet.
 
UnDefinitive said:
the Supreme Court decision forced nothing on you ... your ideals are your ideals ... when has any law crafted really ever changed your life one iota. What if you were not made aware of this ruling by the courts ... would you be out there in the public forum fighting for a drafting or crafting or whatever more laws ... this is not a duty to die law ... yet.
Click to expand...
It has planted a seed and there are a lot of people who don't like what they can see would potentially grow from it. For the next year, nothing's changed. That's true. And as others have said it all depends on what happens in the next year as to how much that seed can be fertilized. I think poor attitudes already exist towards PWDs and that makes the potential worrisome.


If I weren't made aware of the ruling maybe I wouldn't have seen how disability was used in it. So, maybe it's good that I was.
 
Kimmio said:
@UnDefinitive of course laws affect how people live their lives, and shape attitudes
Click to expand...
Yes ... if you get caught breaking a law ... you have to pay ... so I would say ... too many laws make too many criminals ... there is one law of this land that needs to be enacted ... a basic living income for every citizen .... that is something that you should lobby for ... if the government actually sees it's way to delivering that .... then you will have a footing to make further change in your immediate community first ... it will spread ... without government intervention ... as long as you have to keep jumping through legislative hoops to prove that you are disabled enough or depressed enough or deserving enough of basic human rights ... you are just part of the PWD industry ... people are making money deciding what benefits you are eligible for ... if you actually had the basic necessities .... they would all be out of work ... no more designing disability tax credit laws that you need two lawyers to figure out how to actually claim the benefit ... I'm just saying ... if you are so passionate about helping, not just yourself, why not lobby for that ... I have tried to sow this seed over and over in this forum ... people say oh yes what a good idea .... and then move right back to alleviating the government of any responsibility around eradicating poverty first ... now I could be totally wrong ... but I think of most benefit, to more than a few of the participants in this forum, would be the guarantee that they would be able to afford the basics whether or not they were able to pass an interview defining their right to them.

As far as this particular law is concerned ... show me the lineup ... I want to get on the list and state that I would rather die than live in a country that has a government insistent on humiliating and oppressing their poor rather than actually crafting a law that would give them back their right to a dignified life. So kimmio .. would not a guaranteed annual income help you a lot more than the rewording of this law ... would it not make more sense to lobby your government for that than anything else at this point?
 
Sure it would help. If everyone were happy and had enough I'm sure fewer people with disabilities would feel like they wanted to die for being pushed to the margins. Plus an extra guarantee that extra health care and assistive needs be met for those who need them. The problem with the wording of the law is creating a situation whereby to live differently with impairments is seen as a reason to want to die. I have a real problem with that mindset - obviously, 60 some odd pages later. So the wording is still an issue. People didn't struggle through decades to evolve human rights for nothing.
 
Laws pertaining to this ruling are going to go through long before anything resembling a garaunteed basic income ever does. @UnDefinitive so you focus on that if that's what you think is a priority - thanks, it's a good idea - but in the meantime I'm still concerned about this.
 
Kimmio said:
So the wording is still an issue. People didn't struggle through decades to evolve human rights for nothing.
Click to expand...

People struggled to change this Universal wording ...
  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

to this specific to Canadians wording ...
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms Marginal note: Rights and freedoms in Canada The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
and then people struggled some more to provide supplementary wording to guide you through understanding the original/constantly modified wording
And if that is not enough wording to struggle through ....
 
@Kimmio ... here are Mr. Fletcher's ideas ... maybe call him up and word it out together to your satisfaction ...
(c) have been diagnosed by a physician as having an illness, a disease or a disability (including disability arising from traumatic injury) that causes physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable to that person and that cannot be alleviated by any medical treatment acceptable to that person, or the person must be in a state of weakening capacities with no chance of improvement; and ...
(d) be of sound mind and capable of fully understanding the information provided to him or her under subsection (6)
BILL C-581


An Act to amend the Criminal Code (physician-assisted death)


first reading, March 27, 2014
 
Well that's not what the Supreme Court came up with at the end of the day, is it? And it was still the wrong use of disability. Impairment arising from traumatic injury? Disability is in society not in the person!

Anyway...how many times must I say it. You did say about 20 pages ago that there's no point arguing it here. So be it.
 
So be it ... however, should you continue to aspire to amending laws ... you might take into account critics' various concerns with (Bill C-51) before you find yourself on the wrong side of the anti-terror law which to my understanding is in direct violation of Universal Right Article 9.
  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
As law professor Errol Mendes cautions:

"The law would effectively turn CSIS into a police force that can engage in acts that would otherwise be a violation of the Charter and the Canadian Constitution. All CSIS need do to use these new powers is secure a “disrupt threat” warrant from a judge, which would allow the agency to take a broad variety of actions to reduce any real or perceived threat to the security of Canada."
 
i wonder when canada will have its first Ferro-Canadian arrest?

who will be its lawyer?

(perry mason, of course)

kinda funny if someone releases a free range algorithm on the 'net that will become someone's competent and accurate legal council

we're in the time of legends indeed

hey unsafe, ya gots some banana still on your lip --here, i'll instantiate you some natural kleenex to complement it :3
 
Wow. If I were reading this without knowing the topic is about assisted suicide, I would think you were arguing about a new law that said PWD must be euthanized @Kimmio . Such a pessimistic view of the world and of people. All this ruling did was give people a choice. I do not think there will be nearly as much gloom and doom as you predict.
 
Kimmio said:
I think the Supreme Court decision forced ideals on me that I can't accept unless we are able to craft laws that reflect the other side of this too.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that I posted something like this in my first post. Post #5 on this long, long thread.
 
UnDefinitive said:
Yes ... if you get caught breaking a law ... you have to pay ... so I would say ... too many laws make too many criminals ... there is one law of this land that needs to be enacted ... a basic living income for every citizen .... that is something that you should lobby for ..
Click to expand...


I've been saying this since the 1960s - just change the last phrase to 'that is something that WE ALL should lobby for'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top