Posted by unregistered user at 9/29/08 6:54 p.m.

And just think what 2.5 million dollars would do to help so many terminally ill patients in a hospice program live out the remainder of their days in peace and comfort.

For shame, the amount of time and energy to kill people when you could put that effort towards making people's lives more comfortable so they wouldn't HAVE to kill themselves.

Assisted Suicide is still murder.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/29/08 7:32 p.m.

I think we should legalize it for Democrats only. That way, the more the merrier!!!

Posted by unregistered user at 9/29/08 8:25 p.m.

Bravo Booth,

The ultimate gift of dignity is to allow someone that has led a good life to die with grace and without pain. Modern day medicine has allowed many to live very long lives, but sadly, at times, it comes with great personal pain and incredible cost to their families.

If someone has made a choice, while of sound mind, then the government should get out of their way and allow them to die a peaceful death.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/30/08 8:01 a.m.

Thank you Booth Gardner. End of life decisions should be made by the persons involved.....not the government, the church, and certainly not strangers that think they have the corner on the "moral values" market. I won't insist that anyone avail themselves of the option.....just don't tell me I can't.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/30/08 10:49 a.m.

Thank you Booth.

Thank you for working so hard to give patients the right to decide for themselves.

And shame on you Joel Connelly for being both petty and mean. You've lost another reader.

Posted by 8bitjoystick at 9/30/08 11:00 a.m.

Calling it assisted suicide is a right wing biased frame. It is death with dignity you should change the headline now.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/30/08 12:01 p.m.

Suicide of any description is the ultimate rejection of the virtue of hope. Our life is not our own (did we make ourselves?), but a gift from God. If more people only knew that pain and suffering can be redemptive when united with the sufferings of Christ, for their own sins and the sins of others! Suffering is endured not for itself but for a good end and becomes ennobling.
Even so, why do those who want to kill themselves not simply do it instead of attempting to pervert the medical profession and the Judeo-Christian tradition? Hmmmm?

Posted by unregistered user at 9/30/08 1:53 p.m.

To the post by "8bitjoystick" below. Get a clue. Don't try to give "dignity" and a false nobility to "self-murder with help" -- the literal meaning of "assisted suicide" by labeling it with a meaningless marketing slogan to make it sound more palatable to the weak-minded you'd like to persuade to vote for this travesty.

Posted by RationalThought at 9/30/08 2:03 p.m.

Don't let men in pointy hats tell you how to live your life!

Posted by seandr at 9/30/08 9:45 p.m.

Joel - I must be missing something here. If someone decides to end their life, what business is it of yours?

Posted by Blue Racer at 10/2/08 10:19 a.m.

Seandr - Sick people can end their lives now. They can OD on over the counter meds and they have other options.

It's bad to put a system in place that encourages death. Every elderly patient will hear the whispers: "did you consider suicide? Your insurance company will pay for it and you'll make it a lot easier on everyone if you'd just die now".

Posted by GreenLife at 10/2/08 5:00 p.m.

How is one's opposition to I-1000 an example of trying to impose values on others? It is I-1000 that is trying to impose values on me and on our society. I-1000 forces me to participate in and pay for(with a new bureaucracy) the "self-murder" of others, as a member of this society. It's a misnomer to say "the government should get out of their way". As has been mentioned, if someone wants to end their own life, the government is not currently standing in their way. So why do you want to get the government involved now?

Posted by GreenLife at 10/2/08 5:03 p.m.

To the unregistered user who referenced Democrats in an unfortunate comment above - the opposition to I-1000 cuts across political, religious and economic lines. People across the board see the folly of this Initiative, including many Democrats.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/2/08 7:02 p.m.

How sad for Booth Gardner that his "last campaign" is dedicated to killing the innocent. "Death with dignity" is such a misnomer. Anyone who wishes to have death with dignity will have it. Dignity is defined by the way in which a person accepts their fate. It is not something that can be given or taken away. After spending a year with my Mother who was dying from ALS, I can tell you what an incredible gift that time was. She was a woman who had dignity and grace up until the day that she died. The strength that she showed to her family and friends is something that could never have been imparted in any other fashion. The cycle of life teaches many lessons. It is not about pain, pain can be managed for almost all that experience it at the end of life. The cost of physician assisted suicide is too high. Our physicians have a hypocratic oath that states, "first do no harm". Physician assisted suicide is murder no matter what nice little phrase the proponents may choose. Vote no on I-1000.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/2/08 8:25 p.m.

I-1000 is not about Death with Dignity but about death to those deemed to be a burden. It's all about the money, as is evidenced by the amount of money being poured into the campaign to get this deceptive initiative passed.

While the "Death with Dignity" proponents try to make us believe that this initiative is about one's own personal choice to die, the wording of 1-1000 does virtually nothing to protect the terminally ill person from others who might benefit in some way from hastening that death. Look at places like the Netherlands and Oregon. Abuses of the Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia laws in those places are rampant, underreported and under prosecuted.

Take the time to read I-1000 on the internet. It is a bad law for so many reasons. Please vote No on 1-1000.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/3/08 11:32 a.m.

Great post, Joel. And don't worry about losing a reader or two as you just picked up many more, including me.

Calling this death with dignity is like calling abortion freedom of choice. They both involve the taking of human life, except abortion involves a mother murdering her child and I1000 is self-driven. And why so many care about I1000 defeat is because it further fosters our culture of disrespect for life, which is exponentially more lethal than anything George Bush gets accused of. The other reason is the ethical and moral dilemma it puts our medical profession into.

Let's help I1000 assist it's own suicide.

Posted by unregistered user at 10/7/08 6:19 p.m.

I disagree with this, passing I-1000 will pressure people into taking their own lives. Their relatives may look down on them, for religious beliefs or for other reasons, and their legacy will be forgotten. Another point is that the patient might not be in the right mindset when they OD and the relatives may not have knowledge of it.

Posted by MarkD at 11/1/08 12:40 p.m.

I think it's strange that the people pushing for "Death with Dignity" aka medically-santioned suicide are the ones calling opponents mean-spirited and inhumane. It's sad that we can easily label people with terminal disease "undignified" and the only way to restore dignity is through suicide.
I have lost a few family members from disease as they get older. They had very dignified deaths by letting nature take it's course. Family gathered around, supported each other, and nurtured our loved ones until the end. That is dignity.

To the people who say they can't stand to see their family member suffer through disease: Medicine can comfort the patient without killing them. Realize that it is you who is suffering and it's you that wishes that it would all be over. That's not dignity, that's selfish.