Misleading Article on Euthanasia Survey -TV3

Right to Life challenges TV 3 regarding its article concerning Euthanasia,  posted on its website on Friday 20th January. The article is in our opinion not only biased in favour of euthanasia but it contains factually incorrect statements.  The media have both the duty and responsibility to provide factually correct and unbiased  information to the community which it serves.  That TV3 appears to be actively promoting a change to our laws which would permit doctors to kill their patients is of great concern. It is  TV3’s duty to contribute to an informed debate on this threat to life and to be accurate in their news articles.

The TV 3 online article leads off with the following statement…

[Read more…]

Euthanasia Group Supports Lethal Dose for Disabled and those with Alzheimers and Dementia

Right to Life warns the community that the real agenda of the euthanasia movement that seeks to have the law changed to allow a doctor to kill his patient or assist in his suicide, is not to deal with unbearable pain but to advocate for a far broader application by  which anyone who expresses the desire to die has the legal mechanisms in place to enable their doctor to kill them.

We believe that ultimately the VES consider there are lives not worthy of living.

The Voluntary Euthanasia Society [VES] has campaigned under the mantle of compassion for the right of doctors to administer a lethal dose to those patients in a terminal condition, suffering intolerable pain. Now though, the VES has revealed in a recent survey of 200 Waikato doctors, its support for changing the law so that those with Dementia and Alzheimers conditions may be killed by their doctor –euphemistically now re branded as, Physician Assisted Dying or PAD.

 

The third question in the survey, asked doctors if they would support PAD in the following scenario, provided the patient had given approval while still competent: “If I develop severe dementia resulting from Alzheimer’s disease, or degenerative brain disease due to arterial disease or other agency, where my mental competence has deteriorated to the extent that I am no longer able to recognise close relatives or friends, and am totally dependent on others for basic physical needs e.g. eating food and drinking fluids, spoon feeding, toileting for incontinence, dressing, I would request that I be given medical assistance to die.”

We do not forfeit our inalienable right to life because we have dementia or Alzheimers. We are still human beings made in the image and likeness of our Creator.

To legislate to allow doctors to kill their patients would change the whole ethos of the care of the elderly in retirement homes. To kill the patient in care would become a treatment option.

Today there are thousands of our precious elderly who are receiving loving, compassionate care from  dedicated nurses and caregivers in our nation’s retirement homes. It is unthinkable that  many of these elderly who have spent their lives caring for a family, should in their last days be considered a burden on society and qualify for a lethal injection from a doctor.

It is frightening to think, that the Voluntary Euthanasia Society consider a lethal injection for the dependent elderly,  as the “final solution” for an increasing aging society. We are in grave danger of following in the bloody footsteps of Nazi Germany.

The Nazi’s euphemistically called the extermination of the Jews at concentration camps during world war II, the final solution.This was the culmination of the infamous Nazi T4 euthanasia programme that resulted in the murder of 350,000 Germans and finally resulted in the murder of 6 million Jews. Today the VES, an advocate for a culture of death hide their intentions  to kill the vulnerable patient with a lethal injection that sends the soul into eternity within two minutes, behind the alluring lie,” medical assistance in dying.”

Right to Life asks when is the media going to expose the real dangers of the euthanasia movement . When will the public be alerted to the real threat that Euthanasia poses to the lives of the most vulnerable in our community; the disabled, the aged and the seriously ill?

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life

Fraudulent Euthanasia Petition Launched by Pro- Killing Group

The Voluntary Euthanasia Society [VES], which supports a law change to allow doctors to kill their patients or assist in their suicide, has launched a petition to Parliament. Right to Life is opposed to this fraudulent petition and encourages citizens not to sign the petition.

The wording of the petition is fraudulent and is intended to deceive and entice citizens into supporting it.

The petition reads: “The undersigned respectfully request that the New Zealand House of Representatives investigate fully the public attitudes towards the introduction of legislation which would permit medically assisted dying in the event of a terminal illness or an irreversible condition which makes life unbearable.”

The VES is seeking to disguise the murder and killing of patients under the guise of “medically assisted dying”. We already have medically assisted dying,  with compassionate and quality palliative care,  provided  by dedicated staff at Hospitals and Hospices throughout New Zealand. Pain control is achieved without resorting to killing  the patient.

[Read more…]

Open Letter to Dr Robert Jonquiere, Dutch Euthanasia Advocate, Supporting NZ Law Change to Allow Doctors to Kill their Patients

Rob-JonquiereDr Rob Jonquiere, the ‘principal architect’ in procuring Doctor Assisted Killing in the Netherlands, has commented on our website in relation to a recent media release made by Right to Life, which challenges his advocacy of euthanasia in New Zealand.

Here is Dr Jonquiere’s comment;

It is a pity Right to Life and its spokesperson Ken Orr did not have the decency to address their concern directly at me, telling me that “I am not welcome in New Zealand”.
That Right to Life has an opposing view from mine when it concerns end-of-life decisions is their good right. I do not know why they do not accept that I have a same right to my view.
Why then – instead of an open discussion – limit your opposition to publications in friendly papers and media; publications by the way that are full of details of myself, my deeds and of the Dutch practice and law,that are not only completely unsubstantiated but even in many cases biased by your own ideas.
Instead of suggesting me not to come, you would show your Christian face meeting with me, openly and respectfully, trying to clarify our differences; trying to get the facts right and finding out where our ideas are alike – and I think we have more in common than you expect – or how we can together address the concerns I have as well as you. Only I believe my concerns can be seen to in a decent law, such as the current Bill in New Zealand and as proven in the Netherlands.
I will be coming to New Zealand anyway – welcome by you or not – and invite you to accept my invitation for a meeting.
Amsterdam, NL
Rob Jonquière,
WF Communications Director

Here is the Right to Life reply to Dr Jonquiere,

[Read more…]

The Hon Peter Dunne Opposes Death Penalty for Drug Dealers but Supports Death Penalty for Unborn

Right to Life Applauds the Hon Peter Dunne for opposing the death penalty for two Australian drug dealers in Indonesia. He states, “ There is an understandable sense of revulsion developing about that probability, leading to a renewed focus in this part of the world at least about the barbarity of the death penalty. We should be prepared to speak out against the death penalty, as and when it is applied, on the principle that no state has the right to deprive its citizens of life.” 

Right to Life totally agrees with Peter Dunne, that no state has the right to deprive its citizens of life and that the death penalty is barbaric. This principle is enshrined, in the New Zealand Bill of Rights, Article 8, Right not to be Deprived of Life. New Zealand abolished the death penalty in 1961. One of the reasons for its repeal was the fear of executing an innocent person. Yet what person could be more innocent than a defenseless unborn child.

Why is Peter Dunne inconsistent in his opposition to the death penalty? He opposes the death penalty for convicted drug dealers on one hand, yet he supports the death penalty for innocent and defenseless unborn children, who are not guilty of any crime, on the other.

[Read more…]

John Key Opposes Human Rights Abuses in Iraq

Media Release Tuesday 10th February 2015

Right to Life commends the Prime Minister John Key for his stand on the horrific human rights abuses perpetrated by the terrorist group Isis. At Waitangi last week,  he said:

“when people are being beheaded by kids, burned by kids and thrown off buildings. Well sorry. Give me a break. New Zealand is not going to look the other way.”

That innocent men, women and children in Iraq should be deprived of their lives by barbaric, beheadings is appalling. These are satanic inspired crimes against humanity that cry out to God for vengeance.

But wait, are we to not guilty of human rights abuses in our own country. Every day in our public hospitals, our own children in the womb are cruelly dismembered and beheaded not by terrorists from ISIS but by abortionists, who are appointed and paid by the state. These too are crimes against humanity. [Read more…]

Canadian Supreme Court Rules Doctors may Kill Disabled or Terminally Ill Patients

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil?

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil?

The Supreme Court of Canada in a unanimous decision of the nine Justices in a breathtaking act of judicial, arrogant, imprudence have removed the protection of the law from the most vulnerable members of the community, the seriously ill and the disabled. The Court  has concluded that their lives are not worth protecting. The citizens of Canada should now rise up in anger and demand that their Parliament now legislate with urgency to overthrow the unprincipled and callous decision of this arrogant Court which violates the Canadian Constitution.

Why are many of our Churches silent? This is a further wake-up call for all New Zealanders. We must be alert and active to ensure that the culture of death that is being unleashed on Canada is not unleashed on the most vulnerable members of our community. Be aware that the Labour Party is threatening to bring into Parliament similar legislation here. The price of life is constant vigilance.

The Supreme Court decision strikes down the Rodriquez decision of 1993, which proclaimed the state’s obligation to “protect the vulnerable” which outweighed the rights of the individual to self-determination. Canada now joins the Netherlands and Belgium which have laws that allows doctors to assist in the suicide of their patients.

[Read more…]

Advocates for Killing of Unborn Refuse to Accept that the Child Experiences Excruciating Pain in Abortion

Media Release 4th February 2015

Right to Life is alarmed that the Abortion Law Reform Association [ALRANZ] in a recent post on its web site, claims that an unborn child at 20 weeks gestation does not experience any pain when her legs and arms are ripped from her body by an abortionist.  ALRANZ is promoting a blatant falsehood and doing women a great disservice.

Can you visualize  being an unborn child having your limbs violently torn from your body as you writhe in absolute agony with your mouth open in a silent scream.  ALRANZ though of course would say that you were mistaken in your perception that you were feeling pain.

Right to Life challenges ALRANZ to produce the evidence to support their appalling claim. The assertion that the preborn feel no pain is made in the logical vacuum that accompanies utter and profound ignorance and is without support from, or regard for medical facts. Those who seek to justify the murder of unborn babies resort to all sorts of myths and falsehoods to make their case and assuage their conscience. They in fact have to live in a world of lies and misinformation in order to defend their willingness to destroy the unborn and make that defence seem palatable. [Read more…]

Does the Pill cause abortions?

The following article is a re-post from the Family Edge section of the MercatorNet.com website dated 29th Jan 2015

Even during the wildest times of my youth, I would never have wanted to be the cause of an abortion. Yet, there is a possibility that I have been responsible for one, unaware. How? Because of contraceptive methods that my wife and I used before we knew about the natural methods.

nw logo

While women’s positions on the legal and moral question of abortion vary, most would agree that full disclosure of the risk of abortion is a basic right of women using contraceptive drugs.

However, studies conducted among women 18-49 in the US[i] and in six European countries[ii] showed that about 8 out of 10 women do not know about the potential of some contraceptives to cause abortion.

The same studies shows that 75 percent of them would want to be informed about any reasonable possibility of this happening, and 3 out of 10 women would choose not to use a contraceptive that would risk causing an abortion.

Let’s look at the facts. [Read more…]

Opposing physician-assisted suicide ‘is the right position for a liberal to take’: Disability activist

The following is a re-post from the LifeSiteNews website first published on 16th Jan 2015

Featured ImageMarilyn Golden is not what many people picture when they think of the fight against physician-assisted suicide – but maybe she should be. The Berkeley-based activist boasts of shaking hands with President Obama, lauds “great champions of disability rights” like Senators Tom Harkin and Ted Kennedy, and is concerned with “environmental justice.” But she also encourages liberals and progressives to break out of their ideological straight-jackets on the issue of physician-assisted suicide.

In a recent interview, Golden discussed her 25-year history with the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, including her role promoting the Americans with Disabilities Act and stronger measures to assure that transportation and public accommodations are accessible. Golden told J Weekly, a publication covering the Jewish community in the San Francisco area, that she opposes physician-assisted suicide:

Because of direct threats to the disability community, but also because it’s a danger to everyone. People often think, “This is the right position for a liberal to take.” But it turns out that where assisted suicide is legal, some people will lose their lives without their consent through mistakes and abuse. No safeguards have ever been enacted or even proposed that can prevent an outcome that can never be undone.

[Read more…]