Read the article.
Basically a woman in California is selling suicide kits that contain a plastic bag and a hose to connect to a helium tank. The person then rents a helium tank from a party supply store, hooks the hose up, puts their head and the hose in the bag, turns on the helium, and quite quickly loses consciousness and dies.
First of all, what a creepy lady.
To the point though.
I will state that I am against assisted suicide. Unequivocally, period, no discussion.
My question though is this - why are liberals so squeamish about their beliefs?
Oregon wants to have assisted suicide. They consider themselves progressive and, in my opinion, seem fairly arrogant about their enlightenment on the matter.
So, why the law against a mechanism for doing it?
I did some quick research on death by helium and, quite frankly, it seems like a fairly good death. Helium is lighter than oxygen so it quickly fills the lungs and displaces the oxygen. A person would likely pass out fairly quick because of the loss of oxygen. So basically you would rapidly drift off to sleep and proceed to die in a few minutes from oxygen depravation. You would be unconscious throughout.
So what's the problem?
Why not welcome this?
Why not allow home abortion kits?
I have always suspected that somewhere, deep inside, liberals know that a lot of their beliefs are full of it.
They consider themselves intelligent (I have always been confused as to why) and their beliefs are the reasoning of a rational person. When the belief is put into practice though, they have an issue.
Believe in "death with dignity" or the "freedom to choose", just spare them the details.
Why the resistance to talking about the bloody, barbaric details of abortion? It's not a baby they are killing, it's just a collection of cells that they are removing. Some of the more extreme feminists actually call it a parasite.
So the question is, why would someone give a blow by blow account of having a mole removed but not their abortion? Either one is just the excision of cells.
So, that is the question this week.
Why do you think this is an issue?
If they are so convinced they are right, why do they shy away from it? Are they worried about public perception? If their belief is right then wouldn't they want to bring the public to their side? Isn't education the best way to do it?
Why do they hide behind euphemisms if they are on the right side of the issue?