Expansion of MAID delayed until after next election

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
The point is few understand the complexities of death ... because the powers believe it is to their benefit if we are stupefied!

Can anyone relate responsibly ... given how little we wish to know?

Eg. "You don't need to know that ..." egos in my ears ... then some ears are plugged ... leaves the commoner (Johns, Joan) stunned!

Joan sometimes gets buried as Davy Jones Loch Ur ... and the need to look into all things!

"Nah! We don't want to do that ..." imagine such a response!

Father ... these folk cannot do these things ... because of mindless Ness ... it is like an Oriental Express going the wrong way! De tracked or renegade ... outlier or endogeneity! Cracked ...

Still ... we don't know the difference! Improper desires ...
 
Track 2 is an ethical nightmare for sure. And it shouldn't be used to sweep inequalities under the rug. But I am not totally opposed.

I cannot really understand anyone's total opposition to the idea. Are there no extenuating circumstances any of you would consider?

The slippery slope argument is a good one. I get that.
 
Always extenuating circumstances but if you follow the book of firm rules ... it'll cause trouble in your head ... for in the book ... human contrived mistakes to question! The lawmakers will tell us about the Rule of Law ... and there materialism implodes ...

Many of my instructors through my life experience declared the book was right and there were no exceptions ... and then a flame started in the dark ... spontaneously ... all over how the exception found its way into perfection ... prodigal they say! Just garbage ... and ever since powers have declared justice as garbage ... thus the waste of humanity! Much of it doesn't process the difficult portions and shards ... in the difficult the virtue of lessons and what you gain in knowing ...

You eventually see the one liner is split in multiple versions ... as scraps and scrappers to gather ... so they can shred each other ... Cat Theory!

Dogs run ... to find a cat overcome by nihilism ... nailed! These are like pegs on Diablos Fiddle ... a sad song! Demi urge is spontaneous ...
 
Last edited:
paradox3 said:
Track 2 is an ethical nightmare for sure. And it shouldn't be used to sweep inequalities under the rug. But I am not totally opposed.

I cannot really understand anyone's total opposition to the idea. Are there no extenuating circumstances any of you would consider?

The slippery slope argument is a good one. I get that.
Click to expand...
Total opposition is because it singles out a human rights protected group of people which affects societies attitudes about the value of our lives. It has and it does. People are then free to wonder if that person would wish die because they’re disabled. It degrades us and endangers us. It’s already happening. Disabled children will grow up to learn that they have that “option”. Their non disabled peers will know too. Thought exercise: Imagine if MAiD were offered on the basis of race or gender and people from those groups were in the most pain - not because of their race or gender individually but because of their socioeconomic circumstances and discrimination in society. That would be an abomination that would never fly - actually never say never. It already disproportionately affects disabled women and puts lgbtq+ and non white minorities at risk. And this is at a time when fascism is spreading. The holocaust started with disabled people being killed. Canada’s just doing it through attrition first. The UN was established to prevent war crimes and we are a world at war. There have been powers trying to get rid of disabled people since the last one. Always, in fact. That is the core reason why human rights for disabled people were fought for decades and advancements were made, and things like the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was signed and ratified by Canada. Every backwards move - be it ignoring accessibility in urban planning and housing or cuts to social and health services is a push toward MAiD. It’s a push toward “curing” disability by getting rid of disabled people. Intentionally. MAiD is not a health treatment. MAiD is political and track 2’s objective is to kill disabled people. Hundreds of people who were not close to dying have been deliberately killed by the state. What if it were due to any other unalienable protected characteristic? I don’t think you’d be asking the same question. In any other person who has years to live we would expect robust suicide prevention. Disabled people are human beings who need full human rights and singling us out for death is not a human right. That was sleight of hand. Track 2 is 1000x more offensive than using the R word which is already hateful. Track 2 is hateful because it exists.

Why not read the UN Report to get it? It’s probably a more academic and palatable read because I’m upset by your question, hence my strong response.
 
Last edited:
@Kimmio Laughterlove I read the David Shannon piece you linked recently. Did you give us the link to the UN report? Please post it again or tell me where I can find it in this 12 page conversation.

You didn't answer my question about extenuating circumstances. Is there no scenario you would consider appropriate for track 2?
 
paradox3 said:
@Kimmio Laughterlove I read the David Shannon piece you linked recently. Did you give us the link to the UN report? Please post it again or tell me where I can find it in this 12 page conversation.

You didn't answer my question about extenuating circumstances. Is there no scenario you would consider appropriate for track 2?
Click to expand...
Downloadable in Word and PDF from this page it looks like. The relevant section is Principles Areas of Concern and Recommendations, Right to Life.

 
paradox3 said:
@Kimmio Laughterlove I read the David Shannon piece you linked recently. Did you give us the link to the UN report? Please post it again or tell me where I can find it in this 12 page conversation.

You didn't answer my question about extenuating circumstances. Is there no scenario you would consider appropriate for track 2?
Click to expand...
No. There are few extenuating circumstances other than being minutes from death that I would agree with track 1, actually. That’s what it was supposed to be for, prior to 2014. We were misled down a slippery slope now people can openly ask preposterous questions about who it’s ok for the state to kill. That changes the public’s whole mindset and not in a good way. If anything disabled people need more conscientious protecting these days. Who’s going to hide us in their attics, heaven forbid, when we need extra help and can’t even get in?
 
Last edited:
Our society has become so afraid of "suffering" that many want an easy way out. That can be a problem when it comes to MAID.

I am very concerned about the impact this can (has had?) on disabled people.
 
Track 2 was driven by mainly wealthy people who decided that if they became “too disabled” (which was left subjective and discriminatory just in the thought process it took) they would be able to get a permission slip to die. That downgraded the rest of us - who are disproportionately poor. It completely ignored that socioeconomic circumstances and discriminatory physical and social environments both entrap already disabled people and are themselves disabling.
 
Northwind said:
Our society has become so afraid of "suffering" that many want an easy way out. That can be a problem when it comes to MAID.

I am very concerned about the impact this can (has had?) on disabled people.
Click to expand...
It’s been extremely depressing, watching it happen. They passed Track 2 (bill C7) on the 11th anniversary of the ratification of the UNCRPD - jerks - in the middle of the pandemic when everyone was at home and nobody could go out and protest, especially vulnerable disabled people.
 
Goebbels made a movie, well made propaganda with good acting, that was shown in German cinemas while Aktion T4 was underway. It was about a wealthy wife of a doctor, who had MS, and her husband poisoned her because she wanted to die. He argued in court that it was compassionate and convinced the judge that not doing so was cruel - that the law preventing it, was cruel. There was a back and forth in the film with doctors concerned about their ethical obligations to save lives - eventually another doctor changed his mind. Sound familiar? …this was a Nazi commissioned film. It’s hard to find. Go figure.

Today we have street sweeps of homeless camps, poisoned drug deaths in the many thousands, and involuntary detentions and treatment being legislated with few protections to the rights of the detained. These are human beings. Meanwhile, it’s wealthier folks who can afford to have supports if they wanted, and the legal backing of a powerful lobby group, pressing for MAiD expansion. These people are taking everyone down with them because of their preferred “choices”. It’s not what a compassionate society does.
 
Last edited:
Northwind said:
Our society has become so afraid of "suffering" that many want an easy way out. That can be a problem when it comes to MAID.

I am very concerned about the impact this can (has had?) on disabled people.
Click to expand...
It’s a very scary time to be anyone but especially to be disabled.

I think many of us, who’ve been aware of what’s going on, are traumatized by the existence of this law and how it changes perceptions.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio Laughterlove said:
It comes up on mine, clicking the pdf or the word document.
Click to expand...
I tried again. No luck.
But I have found some additional commentary and read it. You are mostly definitely not alone with your concerns.

Is there a definition anywhere of "reasonably foreseeable" death? This is one of the track 1 criteria. Does anyone know?
 
paradox3 said:
I tried again. No luck.
But I have found some additional commentary and read it. You are mostly definitely not alone with your concerns.

Is there a definition anywhere of "reasonably foreseeable" death? This is one of the track 1 criteria. Does anyone know?
Click to expand...

Is death simply foreseen because of the enthusiastic avarice in the human bulk ... the body as soma? Physical apparition or manifestation?

Bet on the fact id'll blow ... humans are EL bent on destructive activity ... they do not know of what they can control and what they can't ... sometimes a hole in avarice? Vast mystery a Black Void set betwixt the ears ... scull in place? Boney ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top