I wish I could say I was surprised. Zurich voters rejected a referendum that would have restricted suicide clinic attendance to the Swiss. From the story:
Voters in Zurich have overwhelmingly rejected calls to ban assisted suicide or to outlaw the practice for nonresidents. Zurich’s cantonal voters by about a 4-to-1 margin Sunday defeated both measures that had been pushed by political and religious conservatives. Out of more than 278,000 ballots cast, the initiative to ban assisted suicide was opposed by 85 percent of voters and the initiative to outlaw it for foreigners was turned down by 78 percent, according to Zurich authorities. Assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland, and has been since 1941, provided the helper isn’t a medical doctor and doesn’t personally benefit from a patient’s death. About 200 people a year commit suicide in Zurich. “It’s everybody’s own decision. It must be allowed — they do it anyway,” said Felix Gutjahr, a Zurich voter who opposed the ballot initiatives.
No, it “must” not be allowed. The voters chose to allow it. That makes them morally complicit in the suicides that occur.
This is very troubling news. It is clear to me that the Swiss people have broadly rejected the unique intrinsic dignity of human life. Consider: Its Supreme Court declared a constitutional right to assisted suicide for the mentally ill. A few years ago, its constitution was amended to include the “intrinsic dignity” of plants–sort of a forerunner to the new push for the “rights of nature” we are now seeing elsewhere. Good grief, it is against the law in Switzerland to flush live goldfish down toilets, but perfectly acceptable to set up suicide clinics.
Taken all together, I think the Swiss have completely cut the cord binding them to the Western tradition and have jumped headlong into the coup de culture. Over the long run, that will redound very much to the country’s–and perhaps, Europe’s–detriment, since this way of thinking is communicable.
May 15th, 2011 | 7:45 pm
Once we’ve established a right to deliberately take rights, and we’ve established that this right hinges on the personal (subjective, arbitrary) judgments of authority figures, what next?
May 15th, 2011 | 9:04 pm
It’s a strange turn of events to know just how much Christianity was alive-and-well and also how much influence it had once-upon-a-time in their (Swiss) culture, is now withering away (or has already withered away).
I wonder when they will pass a law forbidding the mowing of grass. I mean, who are we to be doing such things to the poor blades of grass.
P.S Don’t let the Swiss find out my dad, when cleaning the pool, killed a number of critters making their home in the pool, and even worse, a whole bunch of algae died in the process as well.
May 16th, 2011 | 1:22 am
If i were a swiss conservative, I’d take a hard look at whether or not I’d want to be known as swiss, and consider emigration or secession. I couldn’t be an american if 80 percent of us believed euthanasia was all right, but that we should open our country to be death central to anyone who wanted to come.
There’s only so much compromise and discussion a person can do.
May 16th, 2011 | 6:43 am
Wesley: The phrase “suicide tourism” trivialises the profound suffering that those who seek it out are enduring. It is a decision rarely taken lightly.
May 16th, 2011 | 8:50 am
It is a very interesting article which can be discussed on many different levels. The subject of rights will always be a contraversial one especially when a matter of life and death is involved. We have been here before with the subject of the right to abortion.
May 16th, 2011 | 9:47 am
I don’t believe this is a matter of the Swiss “loving” assisted suicide, as much as it’s a matter of their respecting other people’s privacy. The same principle, as you know, has been incorporated into their banking system and into their traditional diplomatic stance of non-involvement in their neighbors’ military disputes.
Perhaps the memory of having once been home to John Calvin, who was complicit in having one of his theological opponents (Michael Servetus) burned at the stake in Geneva, has helped the Swiss develop a tolerant outlook that some Americans have difficulty understanding.
HW
Dblade Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
@HistoryWriter
Suppose the citizens of New York City built what they christened was the suicide bridge. There were no police there, only a single bored watchman at the gate. If you wanted to, you could go in and throw yourself off it so long as you told the watchman a good reason. A boat dredged the river below frequently so the corpses wouldn’t pile up.
What would you think of those New Yorkers? Would you think they were compassionate people who respected privacy? Or would it seem ghoulish and morally callous, if not evil?
What if they went beyond that? They passed a law that anyone could come in. You didn’t need to be a NYC resident. Anyone from the USA could show a license and enter, never to return.
The New Yorkers were proud. They were showing tolerance and affirming the right to a person’s privacy. They felt that their suicide bridge was a model of how people should face death. Of course, the few critics vainly pointed out that the watchman rarely ran licenses through the computer to check that they were valid, or that a lot of the people who used it could have been helped not to if people cared about it. The objections didn’t hold any water, pardon the pun.
What kind of people would they be when they encouraged people to throw themselves off of bridges rather than try to save them?
It’s not the best parable, but maybe it will illustrate how the opposition feels.
HistoryWriter Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 6:42 pm
@Dblade,
It’s not a bad parable, but it doesn’t necessarily fit the situation. Here’s why:
New York City already has more than enough potentially dangerous places to accommodate any would-be suicide, yet you can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who’ve jumped from a building, stepped in front of a subway train, taken an intentional walk off one of the city’s many piers or stuck their fingers into one of Con Edison’s transformers in the past year. In short, the presence of the means doesn’t guarantee that people will advantage of them. It’s like visiting Hamburg, Amsterdam or Nevada; the fact that bordellos are legal there doesn’t guarantee that you’ll become customers of one unless that’s what you had in mind in the first place. But I digress.
People who’ve expressed an interest in assisted suicide typically express a prefererence for OD-ing on barbiturates or inhalants that will send them off quietly, effectively and, above all, privately. I believe most people would rather die quietly in their own beds than spend a whole lot of money traveling to Switzerland just to pull their own plugs.
Suppose I learned with absolute certainty that I had an incurable illness that was going to not only kill me, but leave me paralyzed, incontinent and in great pain before it did. What’s wrong with wanting to speed things up a little in order to avoid a lot of discomfort later on? As things now stand I’d have to lie to my doctor, tell him I’m having trouble sleeping and hoard the necessary prescription drugs. That would hardly deter me; it would only force me to be dishonest with someone who’s a good friend. I’d like to think that the doctor to whom I’ve been entrusting my care for the past 25+ years is sufficiently sympathetic to my needs to write the prescription without my having to make up a story about it. And I doubt that I’d be very receptive to a pep talk by him about how suffering edifies.
So what separates us? I think the difference between people on opposite sides of this issue is that one group believes that under some circumstances suicide can be a rational act (think people who jumped from windows on 9/11 rather than be burned alive), while the other doesn’t believe that’s possible at all. The dispute has nothing to do with anyone being callous, immoral or evil, and everything to do with our ability to honor the opinions and desires of another with respect to what he does — to himself alone; the ability to understand, even if his actions are repugnant to our own theological or moral point of view.
HW
May 16th, 2011 | 2:22 pm
They tolerate alright, tolerate you to death!
May 16th, 2011 | 3:11 pm
Way da go HistoryWriter, “IT” is about time some body’s cells teamed to get her, I mean together and told some of these bleeding hearts so call religious Christians that the Swiss don’t love assisted suicide at all. For gods sake they do this so that they can continue to live and have our respect while doing so!~
What next, I ask before they take away the rights of all alien gods as I know them and then establish their own so called Jesus Christ Law Kingdom which is a right that The Almighty Dollar could never see eye to eye with and then were would you human combined fusion mass cells find yourselves as far as the food chain is concerned, I ask?
Come on NOW! So the Swiss made mistakes in the pass by following this so called Christianity but have finally seen the light as to what we alien gods demand of our human slaves, I mean “Compatriotes Amis Bas” and let “IT” not be paid, I mean let “IT” be made perfectly clear that there’s anything wrong with blades of grass and critters of any body cell kinds having their rights and as a matter of fact, there are some alien gods watching you as I write who have their names on the list to become King of The maggots. I would love to see any human so called beings tell these alien gods in their simple blood, bone and flesh body cells that imaginary aliens are crazy to think this way and get away with “IT”. As a matter of fact and like Victor says on occasions, I would even put my Canadian two cents worth in to see “IT” if you know what I mean? :)
If we so called imaginary gods have our say and and our way, as I see “IT” NOW, “IT” is just a matter of Time before we will convince humanity that we are The Next Wave of this earth’s goddly area reality future and those who are following other gods other than The Almighty Dollar, expecting to get better than euthanatia for the next thousand years better think again.
I agree, we alien gods need your body cells but there’s a limit as to what most alien gods will accept cause you’re not the only galaxy around you know! You humans better be careful cause as a matter of fact there’s a large number of gods who have teamed UP NOW to get her and if I were you guys and gals, I would hope that this Victor’s Jesus does exist and HE makes “IT” here before they do, http://www.may21-2011.com/, and make “IT” clear that “ONLY” “The Father” knows best if you get my drift?
As for U>S (usual sinners) we’re in no hurry and are waiting for Mel Gibson’s cells to show U>S the way in 2012 and “IT” is just an accident that the date will be falling on Victor’s 66th birthday and we left “IT” like that cause Heaven knows, Victor has got such a big ego already that most of U>S already consider him some kind of a God and some have already started to call him “Mr V” if you know what I mean? Go Figure! :)
Hey folks! There’s so much more that I wanted to say but I can see Victor’s Dog of 1946 wagging his tail, who was too lazy to help U.S. out during The Two World Wars but he does apologize for coming out late but that won’t cut “IT”! Right folks? Now that he got lucky, lucky, lucky because we gods helped him get through a heart attact and now that he’s got through “IT” and we induced him with 4 new stents, he thinks that he’s got a special bionic heart. Will somebody and/or some body please educate and/or tell Victor that we gods are not afraid of The Old Six Million dollar Man any longer cause he’s an as been just like his so called Jesus The Christ! Right History Writers?
God, I mean got to go NOW! Here comes Victor in the flesh or should I say “Mr V”? :)
Peace
HistoryWriter Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 5:52 pm
@Victor,
I’m sure there’s a message in there somewhere, but I haven’t been too successful deciphering it. Can anybody help??
HW
Victor Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
@HistoryWriter,
For what “IT” is forth, the sibliminal mesage that is screaming at me is that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink!
I hear ya! We all have free will Victor!
So so true!
Peace
HistoryWriter Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
@Victor,
A very good point! Please see my response to Dblade.
HW
May 16th, 2011 | 9:13 pm
It’s not the best parable, but maybe it will illustrate how the opposition feels.
Selling (and buying) suicide is the finale of a process that is all about focusing real hard on nothing at all except your own feelings, your own desires.
HistoryWriter Reply:
May 16th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
@Blake,
Should I be focusing on yours instead?
HW
May 17th, 2011 | 10:32 am
@Blake,
Should I be focusing on yours instead?
HW
All I’m saying is that if your whole life is about nothing but your own will – what you want, what you will, what you demand, what you expect and how it “better” come out just like you want it – the more you cling to your own desires and expectations, the more you are trying to control what is inherently outside of your control.
You magnify your own suffering.
This is perhaps the biggest problem with the great humanist project…the Enlightenment…the revelation that man can and should control every aspect of his world and his time is appealing, but ultimately the higher you fly, the harder the crash. Sooner or later every person confronts the reality that there is a reality, and that it’s bigger than anything a man can control. No amount of ubermensch is enough.
HistoryWriter Reply:
May 17th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
@Blake,
Surely you can’t be suggesting that we ought to accept what happens, resign ourselves to the inevitability of poverty, disease, war, suffering, injustice and so on because these things are inherently outside the realm of human control.
You use the example of “the higher you fly the harder the crash,” but if we accepted that as a guiding philosophy of life we’d never make the effort to fly at all. I’m surprised; I thought you were an idealist of sorts.
HW
holyterror Reply:
May 17th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
@HistoryWriter, HW, you write as if there are only two options: Obsessive focus on control, OR resignation to everything being out of our control. There are other ways to live.
I think you know that.
Don’t you?
May 17th, 2011 | 6:35 pm
Surely you can’t be suggesting that we ought to accept what happens, resign ourselves to the inevitability of poverty, disease, war, suffering, injustice and so on because these things are inherently outside the realm of human control.
No, that isn’t what I’m suggesting.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact