Canada is moving forward with the opportunity to administer “assisted dying” for the mentally ill.

This article explains the situation and, as usual, complicates the question in order to confuse people into accepting euthanasia. The usual utilitarian and sentimental argumentation is used. “Many of those who suffer from mental illness are also poor and homeless. They see no hope and long for a lethal and safe alternative.” or “This person is suffering intolerably and only longs to be in control of her final days. Why should we deny her that choice?”

See how the “choice” issue is thrown into the discussion? “Assisted dying” will be the patient’s choice, but it won’t really because their application for “assisted dying” will have to be approved by a panel of “experts”.

What is so chilling about this article is its intentional use of euphemisms. Doctor so and so didn’t kill the patient. He “assisted their dying.” Psychiatry is such an imprecise science, and diagnosis is so often faulty and subjective that the prospect is even more disturbing. Who ways a person is mentally ill? Aren’t all of us at least a little bit crazy sometimes?

If mental illness means a person losing a grip on reality–who doesn’t at one time or another hold to a crazy theory, a weird idea or a loony ideology? For that matter who is to say that any seriously religious person is sane? From a secular point of view, if you believe in angels and demons how is that different from the person who believes in alien abductions and fairies at the bottom of their garden?

You see where this leads: The people who are really in control of “assisted dying” are the people who decide who is mentally ill or not. We all know that there are plenty of folks out there who quite seriously believe religious people are deranged.

One group of people who are already being targeted are the poor, mentally ill, drug addicted homeless people.

It’s only short hop from offering such folks “assisted dying” to offering to accomadate them in “transitional housing”–places where they will receive medication and mental health assessments which will “assist” them in making the decision to opt for the “final transition.”

Utilitarians will argue that this is an economic, compassionate and sensible solution to a nagging social problem. You can just hear the Justin Trudeau clones exclaim joyously, ” We will eliminate poverty in our lifetime!” Yeh. by killing all the poor people.

Such a culture of death should not come as a surprise. If we can kill the unborn for economic reasons–“This enables a young woman to have a career!” Why not kill the poor, mentally ill people?