Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, gaz 786 said:

I mentioned this some months ago ..it's now been passed in the house of commons ..your views ? 

I'm glad it's passed in the HoC.

There were some truly odd objections made from those who opposed the bill.

Is there any reason why this is in the Sheffield threads, rather than General Discussions?

Posted

Meh, I still think it'll lead to legalised Genocide of people who for various reasons are classed as "Economically Retired/Inactive".

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, XboxMan2024 said:

Meh, I still think it'll lead to legalised Genocide of people who for various reasons are classed as "Economically Retired/Inactive".

 

 

Clearly it won't 

Posted
6 minutes ago, XboxMan2024 said:

Meh, I still think it'll lead to legalised Genocide of people who for various reasons are classed as "Economically Retired/Inactive".

 

 

 No it won't be 👍

  • Like 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, gaz 786 said:

I mentioned this some months ago ..it's now been passed in the house of commons ..your views ? 

The thread is in the wrong section.

Posted
19 minutes ago, XboxMan2024 said:

Meh, I still think it'll lead to legalised Genocide of people who for various reasons are classed as "Economically Retired/Inactive".

 

 

Don’t worry. We’ve had euthanasia over here in NL for years and nothing like that is going on. 

  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, XboxMan2024 said:

Meh, I still think it'll lead to legalised Genocide of people who for various reasons are classed as "Economically Retired/Inactive".

 

 

 

It is such a huge jump from what is an incredibly limited and restrictive proposed system under this bill to the pretty extreme scenario that you're suggesting there, that it's not really fair or logical to really connect the two. If the year is 2080 and Govt passes a law to euthanise everyone over the age of 50 for the good of society, I hardly think it would be fair to look back and say, "I blame that bill passed in 2024".

 

The proposed* system would only apply to people who have been diagnosed as terminally ill, with less than 6 months to live, who are still of sound mind, and would have to make a case that they are suffering beyond a reasonable amount, and that case would have to be agreed to by two independent doctors, before then going before a judge who would make a final decision.

 

 

*worth remembering there are still months of debates and other legislative votes to be had on this yet before it's law.

 

 

 

 

  • Confused 1
Posted

Not in favour. I think like a lot of other folks that it needs deeper consideration than just a short debate in parliament.

 

echo.

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.