Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

Assisted suicide advocates pushing Washington’s I 1000 are resorting to coercion to pressure the media into using their advocacy phrases when describing the pro-assisted suicide initiative. From the Eye on Olympia blog :

I-1000 proponents have been pressing news organizations not to use the words “assisted suicide” to describe the initiative. (I-1000 would allow mentally-competent, terminally ill people who wanted it to be prescribed lethal medication.) I was told yesterday by a campaign official, for example, that supporters in Oregon—the only state to have such a law so far— would refuse to speak with me if I included the word “suicide” in my story...The measures proponents say that the word “suicide” is hurtful to relatives and friends. Also, they say, a terminally ill person, by definition, cannot choose to live.
What crapolla. If that is true, none of us can commit suicide because ultimately a time comes in which none of us can choose to live. Moreover, terminally ill people, like everyone else, can choose to continue living until they die—and sometimes the timing of that event defies expectations and is years from when the end was expected to come. But in this postmodern day and age, accurate facts and precise definitions mean little: Narrative is king.

I hope the media resist the pressure—I am not holding my breath that most reporters will risk the “big get” interview—but good for Eye on Olympia for busting the tactic.

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles