This. It's starting to sound like they can choose euthenasia for you once they've put the option on the table. Maybe you're suffering from dementia and can't legally make the decision, maybe you've suffered an injury and are vegetative, or maybe you're a political dissident. Doesn't matter, the state can now choose suicide FOR you.
Add in how the state can basically find a mental illness for you, and you will be able to be captured, tortured, and finally murdered under the guise of "protecting the nation from mentally ill insurgents".
It's not actually euthanasia. The word means "good death", the prefix "eu-" means good (see also euphoria - good feeling). Depriving people of healthcare, despite taking shitloads of money from them in healthcare taxes (sorry, "insurance"), and then demanding they submit to being killed, is nothing like that. It's institutionalized murder.
I would agree that your prediction aligns with this article. I would also say that -2 back then was pretty baseline for you given your high-energy stalkers. So take some solace in that.
Pretty sure that women killing hundreds of men is genocide, not economics.
I just linked you an example of a woman not only being euthanised but being used to advertise the program. The article mentions multiple other women euthanised as well.
shrinking the welfare budget,
What are you going to do with the people on welfare then? If we were talking about anything other than MAID, you and countless other liberals would be referring to these euthanised people in derogatory and dehumanising eugenicist language. A satirist couldn't invent the level of cognitive dissonance liberals have about MAID.
From the article:
However, B.C. was quick to approve Hatch’s application for MAID. “There were no other treatment recommendations or interventions that were suitable to the patient’s needs or to her financial constraints,” reads a CTV excerpt of the MAID approval issued to Hatch by Fraser Health, the health agency serving B.C.’s Lower Mainland.
Maybe I'm being a bluff old traditionalist here, but how does this differ from "murder", possibly "conspiracy to murder"?
This. It's starting to sound like they can choose euthenasia for you once they've put the option on the table. Maybe you're suffering from dementia and can't legally make the decision, maybe you've suffered an injury and are vegetative, or maybe you're a political dissident. Doesn't matter, the state can now choose suicide FOR you.
Add in how the state can basically find a mental illness for you, and you will be able to be captured, tortured, and finally murdered under the guise of "protecting the nation from mentally ill insurgents".
There are lawful homicides. There are no lawful murders. It's in the definition.
It seems so insane that Canada is ok with euthanizing people.
I wish I could say I am surprised Canada is okay with exterminating the inferior and drains on society, but Eugenics was a Progressive concept.
Imp with the rare knee-slapper
It's not actually euthanasia. The word means "good death", the prefix "eu-" means good (see also euphoria - good feeling). Depriving people of healthcare, despite taking shitloads of money from them in healthcare taxes (sorry, "insurance"), and then demanding they submit to being killed, is nothing like that. It's institutionalized murder.
"Doctor. What's that vibrating sound?"
"Be quiet and lay back, it'll ALLL be. Oh. Oh god, yes! Over! Soon!"
We discussed the inevitability of this outcome 8 months ago here: (https://archive.is/dAyDo). I have archived to prevent the editing of opinions.
Turns out you really can justify anything you like behind "elder care is hard." Some are even so craven as to brag.
I would agree that your prediction aligns with this article. I would also say that -2 back then was pretty baseline for you given your high-energy stalkers. So take some solace in that.
Woman featured in pro-euthanasia commercial wanted to live, say friends
Hmm.
What are you even complaining about OP? You want austerity, and Canada is doing austerity. It's another own goal for the liberals.
I just linked you an example of a woman not only being euthanised but being used to advertise the program. The article mentions multiple other women euthanised as well.
What are you going to do with the people on welfare then? If we were talking about anything other than MAID, you and countless other liberals would be referring to these euthanised people in derogatory and dehumanising eugenicist language. A satirist couldn't invent the level of cognitive dissonance liberals have about MAID.
From the article:
"Financial constraints." Imagine that.