Best Of

Trump is playing for time.

https://x.com/disclosetv/status/1935753377385689389

Trump on U.S. military action against Iran: "I will make my decision whether or not to go, within the next two weeks."

TACO.

I don't often sympathise with Donald Trump but Netanyahu obviously launched the attack on Iran against Trump's expressed wishes in the expectation America would be bounced into doing the heavy lifting. Trump is saying, wait a moment ...

I agree. FWIW TACO is the right answer here.

I'm disappointed in you David.

How would you eliminate Fordow then?

I wouldn’t.

Why not?

Just do nothing and let them get nukes then?

Yes. Because MAD kept the peace in Europe throughout my life. Ukraine were conned into giving up their nukes and have paid a terrible price. Nothing else has brought peace to the Middle East. MAD might.

That's insane!

MAD works when both sides want to live.

When one side are suicide bombing religious zealots who think if they die they get an afterlife with virgins, then MAD doesn't work.

One side has shown themselves to be genocidal lunatics of late and it’s not Iran. I am all out of sympathy for Israel.

Ultimately this will pass i think, but people have many different reasons for supporting or opposing on wide societal or very personal terms - on the latter, as much as some will have had family members in pain who wished to have this which informs their perspective there will be others who have spent a single part or much of their lives fighting suicidal thoughts who feel horrified that the government and medical profession could ever support voluntarily ending your life. Basically its very very triggering. Ive tried to state that in as neutral terms as possible, but the concepts here go way beyond easing suffering and its the casting off of proposed safeguards that i am most upset by (im against it anyway)

I do think it will pass, but I genuinely hope we do not see champagne corks popping by those who support the bill

Assisted death may well be desired, but like the adverts for funeral plans it is not really a smiling and cheering matter

I absolutely would be cheering if this passes. Its something I've supported for 30 years, since I first debate euthanasia in the 1990s at school.

'Debate euthanasia'
Schools and their innocence

I was in debate club in school and euthanasia was a major political issue in 1990s Melbourne as they were debating in Parliament whether to legalise it or not (they voted not to then). Should people not be debating topical issues in debate clubs in schools?

Should children be debating the State killing people?
This house believes no, they should not

Of course they should, yes. Children should be learning about the issues facing the country and if it is a major issue being debated then yes of course they should.

Secondary school children are plenty old enough to be both learning about and debating serious issues.

Yeah, i dont agree.

Sorry but the wholesale cancellation of debates of contentious issues within schools that's occurred within recent years is a real rot within our society.

It's a great exercise to take a position, particular one you personally disagree with and try and win a debate on the issue. Every school should encourage this, I'd make it part of the National curriculum.

If you allow assisted dying it is inevitable that some people will be coerced or emotionally blackmailed into killing themselves, whatever safeguards are put in place. If you don't allow assisted dying, a far greater number of people will endure unnecessary pain and suffering. The reality is that there is a trade-off, and there are no easy answers. People can reasonably come to different views on it. It's an emotive topic for obvious reasons, and it's good we are having a thorough debate about it. Being of a greater good for the greater number kind of frame of mind, I am supportive.

I don't believe in the greater good theory when it comes to harm to the vulnerable. I don't think it is for the many but rather a proposal for the few at the expense of the many.

There has not been a thorough debate at all. Leadbetter did not want even to hear evidence from psychiatrists then backed down and now has given them a central role in her proposed law, despite them saying they cannot support it. The law will come automatically into force in 2029 regardless of whether there has been adequate training and preparation and funding, unlike with all other laws. This is crass, incompetent law-making.

With good palliative care there is no need for unnecessary pain and suffering, as palliative care specialists have explained. See also this from Dame Cicely Saunders, founder of the hospice movement - https://x.com/treesey/status/1934969805510963675?s=61&t=wWWeJB3W_ksMJK4LA1OvkA.

The really difficult issue which this Bill does not even attempt to address is when you have someone with dementia who cannot possibly be assisted to commit suicide. Or people with locked in syndromes where they cannot do anything for themselves but do wish to die. In both cases someone else would have to kill them. Is this really a taboo we want to break by making it lawful rather than applying mercy in very hard cases?

People who wish to decide when to die are already free to do so. It is those who do not want to be pressured we should be thinking about. If this law passes, the below describes perfectly what will forever be in the corner of the mind of every vulnerable person, every disabled person, every sick person, every old person.