cods wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 10:11am:


Cods,
Who invented the sanctity of human life?

We did.

Why should our lives be any more valuable than the 1000s of ants you walk on and kill every day?

cods wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 10:26am:



No - but some sort of legislation is well overdue -
I wouldn't let a pet such as a cat or dog suffer the
way we let humans suffer.
We take them to the vet - crying all the way and we get our pets put down even
though they are a part of our family.

cods wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 10:26am:



The Lefties are good on this, it's them Rightwing Catholic types who want us all to suffer.

If there's a Catholic church near you, then walk your dog past it every day to piss on it and take a dump too, and if the 'Father' comes to the church door ~ give him the finger.

For a window into what Mr and Ms Australia think about it, why not pop over to the Guardian Aussie version Comments section.  It's easily 85-90% in favour of VE.  The other 10-15% -- those who think nothing but pearls drip from either Abbott or Keating -- sound retarded.  All they have to offer in support of their opposition to VE can be reduced to: 'It's wrong. I like to oppose. I can't think for myself so rely on has-beens like Abbott and Keating to do my reasoning for me. Doctors will start killing people left and right.'. 

In the above Comments section, commenters frequently remind us that politicians are elected to uphold the wishes of the majority, rather than subject us to their personal opinions.  Once again --- 85-90% of all voters have been demanding VE for decades, with at least 55% of doctors being of the same beliefs

One commenter said that as an ex-nurse, she can't wait for Abbott and Keating to be on the receiving-end of a drip. That woman said her feelings in the event of same will be 'sheer glee'.  In fact, before has-beens Abbott and Keating dare utter a word in opposition to VE, both should have first-hand experience excruciating pain on prolonged basis

People are wondering why (has beens) Abbott and Keating are so brazen as to oppose VE.  Is it their legendary bloody-mindedness?  Is it a deep visceral pain and panic at the thought of losing a smidgin of the control both feed on? 

Me --- I suspect it has a lot to do with money.  So -- do those temporary lumps known as politicians have MONEY in care-homes of various descriptions, in the same way they're reported to have, on average, 30 investment properties apiece? 

Whatever the case, the overwhelming majority of Australians, including doctors and nurses, want voluntary euthanasia.  And they want it to be in effect ASAP

The minority and their loved-ones are free to linger in pain for as long as they like.  Be our guests.  (bet they don't, though. Bet they beg for release. In which case, maybe every single document which pertains to them should be stamped, ' Opposes/opposed Voluntary Euthanasia ' --- to make sure they don't change their minds when it's their turn.  And that goes double for Abbott and Keating and their loved-ones --- no mercy. No pain relief. They demand to suffer to improve their core-self.  Lock them in padded-rooms with water and ignore their screams

The criteria should not just be the terminally ill, when you can no longer wipe your own arse, you have a right to pass away with some dignity.

issuevoter wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 9:10pm:


Exactly. They need to put the disabled and mentally handicapped on the list too.

Enquiring mind wrote on Oct 21^st, 2017 at 11:54pm:


How about deviants too?

I dont know, I am not sure about this Euthanasia law.  Its all well and good on paper, but this opens up potential abuse of law, and people can die.    I can see alot of situation where, a lone elderly got diagnosed with a terminal illness, would agree to it with pressure if they just 'do not' want to be a burden on their kids or carer.

And how can you define in the eyes of law, how long some one can live?  I know, because doctors are notorious on predicting this.  The best they can do is to give a percentage.  But we all heard stories that despite the odds, people went on surviving for longer.   And what if a doctor predicts wrongly, and the patients decided to go through the approval process, but ended up not committing suicide, and then find themselves living longer than predicted.  Will then the doctor be liable for emotional suffering. 

In this case, I am with the conservatives.  I do not believe in assisted suicide.  We now have good palliative treatment available, I think we ought to address the issues of delivering that to those who needed in a timely matter first, and then we talk about Euthanasia.