The average person never will support euthanasia. So, the only way the Culture of Death can 'legalise' it is through tactics like this.
From The European Conservative
By Hélène De Lauzun
Everything has been done by the French government to prevent a balanced debate on the end of life, and to ensure a pro-euthanasia outcome.
A‘citizens’ convention’ voted in favour of “active assistance in dying,” i.e., euthanasia, or assisted suicide, in France last week. Following the model of the citizens’ climate convention set up in 2020, Emmanuel Macron formed a new citizens’ convention in December 2022 to address the sensitive subject of euthanasia.
The principle of the citizens’ convention raises many questions about its democratic value. It is a small assembly of 185 citizens, chosen by lot, who have not received any kind of popular mandate and who are not subject to any form of control or accountability. It is therefore difficult to understand what the legitimacy of the opinions given by this arbitrary Areopagus can be.
To be honest, ‘arbitrary’ is perhaps not the most accurate term. There was in fact a very conscious orientation of the debates, which did not allow for a balanced expression between the supporters and opponents of euthanasia.
For months, President Emmanuel Macron has been extremely clear on the subject: to move French law towards “the Belgian model,” which is extremely permissive on the subject. In contrast, current French legislation is opposed to euthanasia, assisted suicide, and ‘therapeutic obstinacy’—acts or treatments that appear to be unnecessary, disproportionate, or having no other effect than the artificial maintenance of life.
At the citizen’s convention, all discussions were organised in such a way as to achieve Macron’s intended result.
The Catholic website Aleteia has identified several points that exposed the obvious bias under which the convention was conducted. For example, the entire organisation of the process was entrusted to the EESC (Economic, Social, and Environmental Council), a body headed by personalities who are all in favour of euthanasia. A bibliography presented as “the most objective and neutral documentary base possible” was provided to the members of the convention at the opening of the debates, but this bibliography listed not a single document arguing for the dangers posed by euthanasia, such as the noted essay by the journalist Erwan Le Morhedec, Fin de vie en République, a very active whistleblower on the subject for many years.
Speakers who were invited to discuss the issue before the convention were univocally supportive, some even belonged to organisations openly militating in favour of euthanasia. Finally, reports Aleteia, every fortnight, advisors from the Elysée ensured—with the leaders of the EESC, the organising body—that the debates were being held in accordance with the guidelines set by the top.
Under these conditions, the result of the vote of the citizens’ convention is not very surprising. Out of 167 citizens present for this vote, 75% voted in favour of opening up access to active assistance in dying, whether it be euthanasia or assisted suicide. Only 19% voted against, 6% abstained. 67% voted in favour of opening up euthanasia to minors.
The preliminary discussions show that on several occasions, some members tried to draw the attention of their colleagues to the risks and the inevitable drifts—lack of clear consent, liberties taken by doctors against families, financial motivations—if such a policy was put in place. Belgium and the Netherlands offer an obvious counterpoint to prove that such risks exist, and are even pointed out at the European level, but everything has been done to hide this reality. Indeed, the Belgian expert called before the commission, Dr. Corinne van Oost, explained that “everything was going well in Belgium.” Her only regret was that euthanasia was not yet possible for patients with dementia.
Most of the debate in the final phase was about “possible active assistance in dying.” But before that, other proposals were discussed. It is interesting to note that during these discussions on the end of life, the proposals that received the most votes were those that called for a strengthening of palliative care, measures that would
allow equal access to palliative care for all and everywhere on the national territory; strengthen palliative care at home and in nursing homes, in particular via mobile palliative care teams; strengthen the initial and ongoing training of health professionals on the end of life and palliative care.
As it stands, the members of the convention have thus made the great leap, voting, on February 19th, in favour of euthanasia, even while recognising the imperative need for palliative care.
But experts in this field are unanimous: it is an illusion to believe that one can pursue, by law, both a public policy in favour of euthanasia and a policy in favour of palliative care. The latter is bound to disappear in favour of the former, as explained by Quebec philosophy professor Louis-André Richard, who has observed the phenomenon in Quebec.
Between now and the end of the citizens’ convention on March 19th, members have three sessions left to carry out the “harmonisation and reporting phase.” But now that the vote in principle has been taken, there is, in fact, little room left for opinions to change. The terrible machine is in motion, and despite the eminently biassed nature of the convention and its methods, the government can boast of having proceeded with a ‘popular consultation’ to legitimise its deadly choices.
Not all members of this convention are conscious activists acting with a clear agenda—far from it. But as ill-informed, and knowingly directed by those smarter than they are, they lend their naive support to an enterprise that is far beyond them, without measuring the dramatic consequences of their vote.
%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(2)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(2)%20(1)%20(1).jpeg)
.jpg)
%20(1)%20(1)%20(2)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(2)%20(2)%20(1)%20(1).jpg)
%20(1)%20(2)%20(2)%20(1).jpg)
%20(1)%20(1)%20(1)%20(1).jpg){kind=spacer}