With Canada’s Supreme court ruling last week in favour of assisted suicide, we are now seeing the poisonous fruit of contraception and abortion come full circle. The dignity of human life and the transmission of human life, when separated from its natural end, become a play thing of government planners. This sophistry that euthanasia will be administered by consent should fool no one. It will start by simply “recommending” to the patient that “their time has come”. There will be an “understanding”. And if there are no family members around (or perhaps they will be those who really don’t care or, shocking as it may seem, those who actually have a vested interested in moving along the inevitable), the medical “authorities” will simply pull the plug. No resistance? No problem. And when there is resistance? Well, that will warrant a level 2 response.
We’re a really perverse culture, if you really think about it. We put such a heavy emphasis on “consent” in ethical questions that we fail to realize the such a warm and fuzzy phrase is merely the triumph of the will over true morality and the laws that God has placed in every person’s heart. “Consent” over issues like sex and death is really quite superfluous. We don’t have massive sexual abuse or soon-to-be massive abuse over euthanasia because “consent” is the best ethical paradigm on which to run a society. In point of fact, “consent” is a joke because it doesn’t work. Just ask the former fans of Jian Gomeshi. Jian didn’t see a problem with consent, because sex was no big deal. Nobody gets too worked up over casual sexual entertainment, do they? Why should they when sex has been completely stripped of any kind of sacred significance? Just like no one will get too worked up about ending a life which is about to expire anyway. Who cares about consent when the fundamental immoral act is being legalized and has already been accepted by society?
Pope Paul VI said the following about contraception, but it can equally now be said about Euthanasia. In fact, it’s even more appropriate to speak of his prophesy about euthanasia, considering that the elderly and sick are less able to defend themselves than young parents:
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife. (Humanae Vitae, 17)
The reality is that Euthanasia would never have obtained a foothold without contraception. It’s simply the back end of the same evil. And, sadly, the generation that ushered in the Pill is going to be the first generation on a large scale to experience the bitter pill which provided them a false freedom and now a lonely and tragic death.