Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Why Are People Supportive Of Government-Controlled Murder?

Written by:

Published on: January 29, 2020

It is almost incomprehensible that the massive murdering of babies in the womb is still a controversial issue.  Murder is murder at any age and any time after conception.  And, with the erroneous thinking of some citizens that a Supreme Court decision is law, the murdering of the helpless innocents has and is expanding to include older individuals with health issues under the false guise of euthanasia or medically assisted suicide.  Four States in the united States of America already have pseudo-legislation addressing government-sanctioned murder by physician with the numbers expected to grow as this abomination gains popularity among the braindead.  There is such a disconnect in the thinking process of some individuals that actually believe one can assist someone in committing suicide and it not be classified as murder.  I can only assume their thinking revolves around government enacting some type of legislation that declares helping someone kill themselves under strict regulations is not murder but assisting the individual to commit suicide.  There are several articles this writer penned on the farce of government-sanctioned murder by physician at Sons of Liberty Media.

I can’t help but conclude this move toward government-sanctioned murder by physician for the terminally ill or mentally ill adults, teens and children has come from the mantra “my body, my choice” chanted by women who have their unborn, nearly born or newly born murdered and supporters of such atrocity. And yes, Canada is including teens and children in this government-sanctioned murder by physician it terms euthanasia or medically assisted suicide or medical assistance in dying.  Murder is defined as the crime of unlawfully killing a person with malice aforethought.  Homicide is defined as death at the hands of another.  Not all homicides are murders;  but all murders are homicides.  And, the definition of person is an individual human being – man, woman or child.

Let’s start with the mantra “my body, my choice” as a fallacious argument to murdering one’s own unborn child.  Women and supporters using this mantra to justify their unlawful killing of an unborn child consider that child part of their body.  Unfortunately, this is not true.  The uterus is a vessel inside a woman that nurtures a separate individual human being until it can survive outside the vessel.  The child inside the uterus has separate, specific DNA from the woman, can have a different blood type, be a different sex, can feel pain, and even suck its thumb while engaging in movement and respiratory cycles independent from the woman.  This is not a kidney, pancreas or other bodily organ;  it’s a separate “person” from the woman.  The uterus is the reproductive organ of the woman, but what is inside the uterus is not a part of the woman.

When a woman hires a physician to murder her unborn child, she is engaging in a murder-for-hire scenario where the physician is the murderer and she an accomplice.  Yes, it is murder as defined.  It is not a part of her body that she is damaging or hurting or having removed because of disease or illness.  This is a separate individual, a person, that is being damaged, hurt and killed.  Moreover, she is not the one committing the actual act but allowing another to commit the act.  How physicians who participate in this murder can justify their actions knowing through extensive education this is a separate individual, a person, is beyond me.  With the advancements made in medical science, the fallacy of murdering the baby to save the life of the mother is a tactic to justify murdering one patient instead of caring for two.

Trending: As The Show Goes On… Threatening Gun Manufacturers - Where Is Trump’s Department Of Justice & Promise Of Prosecution? Crickets…

The physicians have a conundrum when the mother suffers a complication during childbirth that ultimately takes her life, but they rush to save the baby and the mother.  While it is rare, these incidents still occur.  Why not let the baby die with the mother, if that is the ultimate outcome?  If it’s acceptable for physicians to view the woman as the only patient in order to murder an unborn, nearly born or newly born infant, why is the above scenario different?  Only physicians can answer that, but the correct answer is there is no difference.  The physician is dealing with two separate individuals, persons, that require care.  One is not more important than the other.  And, the unborn child is not viewed as a part of the woman’s body.  So, the medical profession has plenty of hypocrisy to go around and solve.

No one forces a physician to engage in the murder-for hire scenario of murdering babies in the womb.  Government doesn’t put a gun to their head, nor does the woman hiring those services.  Physicians do it by choice using no scientific or medical information learned through years of education.  Nurses, you are not off the hook either because you know better as well.

Ask yourself this question.  If murdering of babies in the womb was made “legal” by a Supreme Court decision, which it was not since courts cannot make law, why are States enacting laws on murdering babies in the womb, babies being born, and newly born babies?  It wasn’t legal and everyone knows it – it was and still is murder.

Hitler made murdering individuals with mental illness, physical disabilities, and genetic disorders law.  Did that suddenly condone murder?  Answer honestly because history tells us the people of Germany were appalled at this action and the world condemned it.  Why now are people applauding the murder of individuals by physician when having genetic disorders, mental illness or physical disabilities under the guise of “euthanasia”?

Does anyone find it odd that the same individuals who condemn the death penalty as “cruel and unusual punishment”, which it isn’t since God declares the penalty of death for certain crimes, applaud death through lethal injection administered by a physician for certain medical conditions as an “advancement in medical care”?  I certainly do.  And, these people have a host of justifications to go along with government-sanctioned murder by physician.

The definition of suicide is death by one’s own hand.  When involving another, that death ceases to be suicide.  But, the justification for helping someone end their own life begins.  It’s acceptable because it is “regulated” by government.  Or, it allows a person to die with dignity.  Or, a person can choose when to end their life before they become a burden to family because of a terminal illness.  Or, it’s more comfortable for that person because they won’t have to suffer.  And, the list goes on.  But, these are fallacies.

Let’s talk about government-sanctioned murder by physician using lethal injections or cocktails as easing suffering.  Back in December of 2019, it was reported experiments were being performed on individuals elected to have physicians murder them with different drug combinations to find an effective lethal drug.  This report indicated that current drug cocktails used resulted in painful deaths that lasted for hours in some cases.  The same lethal drugs are used in capital punishments that are used for government-sanctioned murder by physician.  Let that sink in for a moment.

Some individuals opting for murder by physician using one combination were screaming in pain as the mixture burned their mouth.  Other mixtures stretched out the death process to hours, in some cases 31 hours.  In the latest round of testing of lethal drugs, some individuals couldn’t swallow effectively and some vomited, preventing “proper” dosing.  Others emerged from the coma induced by the drugs and some even sitting up during the dying process.  Some deaths took as long as seven days.  Yeah, one can see how this would be much more comfortable.

None of this sounds like dying with dignity or alleviating suffering.  It sounds cruel and inhumane.  But, it is “regulated” by government using specific criteria.  That should make one feel better – Not!  It’s so “regulated” by government the exact combination of lethal drugs to use is still under “research” and individuals are being used as guinea pigs to find the right combination.  If people are fearful about pain and suffering during the end stages of terminal illness or other illnesses/diseases, it’s difficult to see how dying using drugs that can produce great suffering quells that fear.  Surely, those who support this atrocity and who want physicians to murder them are aware of all this.  Wanna bet they don’t?  Who would consent knowing that?

The “regulation” of physician murder of individuals with terminal conditions by governments pushes this solution in Canada for organ donation.  In other words, the push for government-sanctioned murder by physician is more about obtaining organs than easing the individual through a natural dying process.  One has to wonder if that is happening here in the USA where five States now have passed the legalization of physician murder disguised as “physician assisted suicide”.

If someone assists another to kill him- or herself, it is no longer suicide, but homicide and murder.  No fancy, fluffy language can get around it.

What about individuals suffering from Alzheimer’s or some type of dementia, organic brain disease that affects memory?  If these individuals consent while lucid, what happens when confusion sets in and they don’t remember?  Canada solved that conundrum by holding steadfast the consent holds in place.  While Canada did include a 10-day waiting period between consent and physician murder of the individual, a doctor or nurse can waive that period.  And, once that individual consents, there is nothing the family can do to counter it.  Imagine the fear and panic of those individuals being government-sanctioned murdered by physician when in the confused state of their disease.  Doesn’t sound dignified to me.

Can anyone see the disconnect?  People who condemn capital punishment using lethal drugs champion the use of these same drugs for government-sanctioned physician murder.  One is described as “cruel and unusual punishment” while the other is described as relieving suffering.

Of course, the argument comes in that individuals should be able to decide when to end their life when having a terminal illness.  And, they do without government involvement – it’s called suicide.  The only reason to involve a physician is because they have not the courage to do it.  Remember, physicians cannot dispense the drugs;  they only prescribe them.  It takes a pharmacist to dispense the drug combinations so this involves more than physician and patient.

Just because government enacts a law making something legal, does not mean it is lawful under natural law.

Again, just as with murdering of babies in the womb, it is incomprehensible that physicians would even participate in something like this.  Physicians have plenty of disconnect weaving through their profession or they have a tremendous amount of hypocrisy.  Helping someone manage and navigate a terminal illness or disease does not mean to participate in murder.  Moreover, a piece of government legislation doesn’t negate ethics.

Government is now legislating who can be murdered and who can do the murdering with impunity.  As long as the criteria is met, anyone at any age can be murdered by physician.  Once government can regulate who can live and who cannot, what is to prevent government from adding criteria on demographics or non-terminal illnesses/diseases that are heavily utilizing health care services?  Who is willing to give government such authority?  The Constitution does not give government that authority and God certainly hasn’t.  It’s amazing how many people are willing to allow government to be involved in such.

Let’s put it in this context.  People are appalled when police officers enter the wrong home in no-knock raids and murders an individual in that home then the agency investigates itself and issues a statement it was acceptable.  Government stated it was okay so the officers are cleared with impunity.  So, why the outrage?  Don’t get me wrong.  The police officers were wrong, should not have been there, should not have conducted a no-knock raid and definitely should be held accountable for the individual’s murder.  Why can’t people see that just because government said it was okay and acceptable doesn’t mean it is?  By the same token, just because some physicians think murdering a patient with a debilitating or terminal illness is okay, doesn’t mean it is.

Finally, no one has the right to infringe on the skills of someone else to engage in what is considered a crime.  There is no medical assistance in dying – it’s called medical murder.  There is no physician assisted suicide – it’s murder by physician.  Plain and simple.  It’s a shame some are willing to drink the Kool-aid to support such atrocity.

Become an insider!

Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.

Don't forget to like SonsOfLibertyMedia.com on Facebook, Google+, & Twitter.
The opinions expressed in each article are the opinions of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of SonsOfLibertyMedia.com.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Trending on The Sons of Liberty Media

Send this to a friend