is it true that prolifers are trying to abolish assisted suicide?
I'll take my "hmph" ratings accordingly...I kind of have a "hot take" on this issue. My belief is that all parties to this debate are "pro-lifers" when it comes to someone without a terminal illness ending their lives, barring maybe some people in places like the Netherlands or possibly Switzerland. It sure as hell is that way here in the good ol' US of A.
In fact I might even agree (I'm still thinking this part through) that at least the people looking to stop all forms of euthanasia are logically consistent here. You are alive and you are going to die. That isn't morbid, it is the simple truth. So why should the fact that I am going to die in three months or six months or a year or some other relatively short timeframe grant me access to means to accelerating my death quickly and painlessly while barring me from doing so if my death is five years or ten years or some other timeframe out? There was a time before you were here and there will be a time after you are here. And that's ignoring, of course, how often doctors are wrong when diagnosing life expectancy with a terminal illness.
The hair splitting and "angels dancing on the heads of pins" language the people in support of end of life (only!) euthanasia is so ridiculous I sometimes wonder if they believe it themselves. My sense is the next big step they're going to take is to try to exclude end of life euthanasia from the category of suicide entirely. Not sure how they'll class it, but with dogshit language like "died by suicide" ascendant anything is possible.
Once you start thinking about voluntary death without some sort of accompanying terminal condition, the media is not your friend. The psychiatric establishment is not your friend. And the political establishment is sure as hell not your friend. I wish it was otherwise, but that's the world we live in.