The Netherlands recently made euthanasia legal “for terminally ill children under the age of 12,” with Health Minister Hugo de Jonge citing “a need for active termination of life” of children who are “suffering hopelessly and unbearably.”
Though the policy is couched in altruistic language, it is unbelievably evil. All life is precious and must be preserved, even when things seem hopeless. And why should a child not old enough to drink be allowed to choose to end their own life (even if their parents’ permission is required)?
The Dutch government’s argument that the end of suffering is worth the “active termination of life” (a horrendously clinical term for legalized murder) falls short. Even with sedation or renunciation of medical treatment, a sick child “could take days or even weeks to die.”
This is not the first time that the Netherlands has courted controversy with its assisted death policies. In September of 2019, a Dutch woman with dementia was euthanized against her will, as the doctor responsible not only drugged her coffee but also had her physically restrained as he administered the lethal injection. He was later acquitted of all charges by a judge who declared “that all requirements of the euthanasia legislation had been met.”
Sadly, the Netherlands’ euthanasia policy is the logical result of Europe’s embrace of abortion. With very few exceptions, abortion is legal in the vast majority of European countries, and it’s no coincidence that most of Europe has very liberal euthanasia laws as well. Doctor-assisted euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg, to name a few examples, but Switzerland actually allows patients to administer “a lethal dose of medication themselves.”
Legalizing and even celebrating abortion logically leads to more liberal euthanasia laws. Once you desecrate the sanctity of life in the womb, why should it be untouchable anywhere and anytime else?
We can see the evidence of this right before our eyes in recent U.S. history. Abortion went from being something that was supposed to be “safe, legal, and rare” to becoming a central sacrament of liberal orthodoxy that is now embraced by all major Democrat politicians. In fact, when Leana Wen, former president of Planned Parenthood, tweeted in October 2019 that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare,” she was immediately attacked by pro-abortion advocates who claim the phrase is “outdated” and one that “stigmatizes the procedure.”
The mounting pressure from radical pro-abortion movements is forcing all Democrats to fall in line or get kicked out of office. It’s no surprise that Joe Biden, who was once seen as a moderate on the issue, has recently pledged to make Roe v. Wade “the law of the land.”
Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), one of the last remaining pro-life Democrats to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives, recently lost his re-election bid to a pro-abortion extremist. The message to any remaining Democrats who still might harbor pro-life beliefs could not be clearer.
In one of his most famous speeches, Abraham Lincoln said:
“A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.”
Though he was speaking of the evil of slavery, the same quote could be applied to abortion today. Pro-abortion advocates have so radicalized this issue that America can no longer endure: in the following years, we will either see Roe v. Wade repealed or we may see it codified. If the liberal vision of abortion triumphs, the issue will metastasize beyond control, and we can expect to see many more advocates for the “right to die” instead of the “right to try.”
We’re not just on a slippery slope, we’re in danger of driving off the cliff.
Check out this episode of the Falkirk Center’s podcast: