Dear Adrian
What do you think of this:
Child under 12 euthanised for the first time, Dutch government announces
My Response:
Here is the root-question – to “whom” or to “what” does our individual life belong? Does our living body belong to our conscious-self (does the “individual” belong to the “individual”?) or does does the “individual” belong to an external organ such as the “State” a “class”, or a “movement”? At the end of the day, regardless of whatever group we may assume we are a part of – we are still isolated individuals who have to sit alone with our own thoughts. We can live-out a natural existence from young, to maturity, to middle-age, old-age, and finally death. There can also be death from illness, injury, or natural disaster – including war and all kinds of human cruelty. Of course, injustice can kill an individual from before birth – to anytime after birth. A State can execute (judiciously “kill”) the individual body for any reason deemed a “crime”. As law is relative – “death” can be inflicted for any reason.
Then there is the liberal extreme – where life (regardless of how miserable it might be) – must continue to “exist” to placate those others who live good lives with no suffering. This is the tyranny of continues existence inflicted by those who dominate over the poor they make suffer (suicide is demonised). The question I am asked by the terminally ill is “Why should we be made to continuously suffer to placate the consciousness of those who are not in our position – but who do not want to do anything constructive to improve our situation?” The reality is that even if life conditions are reasonably conducive to a good life – an illness or injury can still make such an existence to be terrible to endure. Continuous and miserable pain coupled with the side-effects of pain-killing drugs (if the latter are available).
In times of war and conscription – even without our agreement – the State decides that our individual bodies will be used as a means to defend itself against an enemy. In that case, the liberals have no problem sacrificing the young and the fit who have everything to live fore. However, when it comes to the ill or injured who are forced to lie in urine-soaked beds – all of a sudden it becomes vitally important that their right “not to exist” is severely limited and/or taken away. This is ironic as the far-right is always talking in support of “eugenics” which advocates that the human working-class be treated rather like pigeon-breeding. certain types are not breed – whilst others are, etc.
The reality seems to be that as individuals we are the owners of our own existences. It is very difficult for the State to prevent the exercising of free-will in this instance. What is te point of charging a corps with a crime? In some countries, like Switzerland, people who are both “ill” and “rich” can access the voluntary dying system. This sees two doctors (or more) having to agree, social workers (having to agree) – and police officers present to support the rights of the patient. The right to “stop” exists right up to the ingestion of the State-administered drugs. I know this because a) I have read through the procedure, and b) YouTube used to host entire videos of the procedure. In one version, a billionaire walked into a lawyer’s office with his solicitor, sat on a comfy sofa and after a few minutes discussing and signing – ingested the drugs. He passed within seconds sat on the sofa – as if asleep. Of course, for minors (that is children aged beneath the age of consent within a certain country) – the decision will involve the parents, doctors, and other practitioners. I neither agree or disagree – but I do know that some human diseases are terrible to experience – particularly in the young.
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 