Sometimes, it seems like the anti-choice nuts believe only rapists, murderers, and terrorists have a Right to Die. From day one, Bush and his bible-thumping cronies have made it their number one priority to interfere with the natural dying process of unborn fetuses, the terminally ill, and cumbersome ex-wives. That's why I am overjoyed that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently broke Ashcroft's fascist stranglehold on Oregon's Death with Dignity program, and Oregon doctors can now get back to the business of killing their patients. But I am also dismayed that Oregon hasn't taken the necessary steps to cut through the red tape so that everyone who needs to die can do so quickly and efficiently.
Under the current law, a doctor prescribes a lethal dose of medication to a terminally ill patient, who takes the drugs home to consume. But that doesn't take into consideration those unfortunate people who are too sick and weak to take the drugs themselves. Should they be condemned to suffer in unbearable pain simply because they cannot lift an arm to pop a pill? Is it too much to ask that a loved one be allowed to administer the medication for them? Can't a person die peacefully, in the comfort of their own home, in the gentle hands of someone they love and cherish?
Another troubling aspect of Oregon's Death with Dignity program is that it requires the patient be of "sound mind" and actually consent to being euthanized. Once again, people who experience excruciating pain day-in and day-out, with no relief, rarely find themselves of "sound mind", and they are often too sick to move let alone sign a pile of legal papers. Wouldn't a cherished loved one know better than a group of silly lawyers when it's time for them to pass on?
Even more strange is Oregon's requirement that the person seeking Death with Dignity have less than six months to live. Why must we wait until a loved one is wasting away, wracked with unimaginable pain and bereft of any "dignity" before we grant them "Death with Dignity"? Wouldn't you want to leave this world when you're happy and in complete control of your faculties, rather than when you're bedridden and shitting yourself every ten minutes?
For that matter, why must we use harmful drugs to end their suffering? Drugs are bad, right? So why can't we just walk up behind Uncle Ernie while he's typing and whack him across the skull with a tire iron? Dead is dead, and he's going to die anyway. Cancer runs in the family - you know he'll get it eventually. It would be doing him a favor if you ended it now. Heck, in a few years, he'll be begging you to do it.
And you might as well make the rounds and take out Cousin Betty while you're at it. She has high
cholesterol, and smokes like a chimney. Won't be long before Doctor Bob catches a spot on her x-ray. Besides, the bitch votes Republican. If anyone needs to die, it's her. Why not show some compassion and put the slut out of her misery? Go on, give her a taste of the ol' Death With Dignity.
In fact, why don't we just take the "Dignity" part out of the equation? It's too restrictive. Where does Ashcroft get off putting THAT monkey on our backs? Maybe they don't DESERVE to die with dignity. Maybe they deserve to die SCREAMING for mercy as flames consume their gasoline-soaked flesh. Maybe next time that YUPPIE PRICK will think twice about parking his stupid gas-guzzling SUV in my spot!