Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On Assisted Suicide, Gov. (Schwarzenegger) Says Voters Should Decide
LA Times ^ | 1/25/06

Posted on 01/25/2006 10:39:44 AM PST by iPod Shuffle

On Assisted Suicide, Gov. Says Voters Should Decide # The issue is too important to be left to elected officials only, Schwarzenegger says.

By Robert Salladay and Jordan Rau, Times Staff Writers

SACRAMENTO — In a blow to California lawmakers attempting to legalize doctorassisted suicide this year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that such a momentous decision is better left to voters rather than to elected officials.

Thirteen years ago, California rejected an initiative that sought to let a doctor supervise the death of a critically ill patient. But with the U.S. Supreme Court upholding Oregon's assisted suicide law this month, lawmakers in Sacramento are pushing new legislation they had hoped Schwarzenegger would embrace.

"I personally think this is a decision probably that should go to the people, like the death penalty and other big issues," the governor said. "I don't think 120 legislators and I should make the decision. I think the people should make the decision, and whatever that is, that is what it ought to be."

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: cultureofdeath; euthanasia; killemall; moralabsolutes; soylentgreen

1 posted on 01/25/2006 10:39:44 AM PST by iPod Shuffle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iPod Shuffle; Jim Robinson

"The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles." -- Ayn Rand

"A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom." -- Patrick Henry

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other." -- John Adams


2 posted on 01/25/2006 10:46:54 AM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (SAVE THE BRAINFOREST! Boycott the RED Dead Tree Media & NUKE the DNC Class Action Temper Tantrum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger
Now batting for the State of California....


3 posted on 01/25/2006 10:48:56 AM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: iPod Shuffle

If leaders are going to shove off all the tough decisions to the will and whims of the voters (masses) then why have leaders in the first place? A Republic should not and cannot be run successfully in this manner.


4 posted on 01/25/2006 10:55:25 AM PST by Russ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Russ

The practical effect is that Arnold will veto legislation that would establish assisted suicide (ie legalized murder). Good for him.


5 posted on 01/25/2006 10:57:20 AM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: iPod Shuffle

I don't believe in mobocracy nor would I want to live in a society where morality is determined by whatever gets more votes from the mob.

If we put the stoning to death of adulterous husbands (or wives) up for popular vote, it might win. So then we make it law?


6 posted on 01/25/2006 10:58:10 AM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Good... That's how it should be.


7 posted on 01/25/2006 10:59:00 AM PST by Russ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; MillerCreek

FYI.


8 posted on 01/25/2006 11:01:37 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iPod Shuffle

It's amazing to me that we would allow this up for a vote....what next "no fault rape" or will we legalize incest? Some things are just wrong.


9 posted on 01/25/2006 11:34:11 AM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine
It's amazing to me that we would allow this up for a vote....what next "no fault rape" or will we legalize incest? Some things are just wrong.

I am not rendering an opinion on suicide, but rather on whether voters should be deciding the issue.

I believe it was Justice Breyer who wrote in his recent book about the people's inability to make valid descions. He was widely blasted on this site. It seems that you are agreeing with his philosphy.

Laws are determined by what the poeple think is moral. If the people believe, and vote that something is moral then that is what they define as moral. By any standard, the term 'moral' is a subjective one.

10 posted on 01/25/2006 11:49:24 AM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Russ
If leaders are going to shove off all the tough decisions to the will and whims of the voters (masses) then why have leaders in the first place? A Republic should not and cannot be run successfully in this manner.

It would seem to me that "...of the People, by the People, and for the People..." would be better served by putting important societal and moral issues to the People. The government is better used to administer to the decisions of the People, rather than telling the People what will be, no matter how repugnant the majority of the People find it...

11 posted on 01/25/2006 11:58:15 AM PST by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ozoneliar
No I wouldn't say I agree with his stance. I just believe in absolute truth. Yes I believe voters in general should decide and vote on issues, but what about those issues which are just clearly wrong, like suicide, abortion, homosexuality? If we are a nation founded on judeo-christian law, then we do have guidelines in place to determine what is right or wrong. If people decide to vote in a law that goes against like homosexual marriage...the courts should slap it down. Just my opinion.
12 posted on 01/25/2006 12:01:15 PM PST by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

"Just my opinion."


No, you're rightly echoing that of God Himself. :)

Absolute truth must prevail, else all is on a slippery slope.



13 posted on 01/25/2006 12:17:51 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (SAVE THE BRAINFOREST! Boycott the RED Dead Tree Media & NUKE the DNC Class Action Temper Tantrum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trebb
Since "of the people, by the people and for the people" is found in the Gettysburg Address and not the U.S. Constitution I'm not sure that the Founding Fathers had your interpretation in mind. I'm sure they never envisioned a government so out of control and all-invasive that we would find it necessary to have the people vote on issues of the day.Obviously they had more faith in representative government than we do.

Of course, I can't imagine Jefferson, Adams, and the rest ever imagining that something like assisted suicide or abortion would ever appear before a legistature (or a court, for that matter).

14 posted on 01/25/2006 5:05:21 PM PST by Russ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: odoso; animoveritas; Laissez-faire capitalist; bellevuesbest; Unam Sanctam; EdReform; Antoninus; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping List.

DISCUSSION ABOUT: "CA Governor Schwarzenegger and the Issue of 'Assisted Suicide'"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To be included or removed from the Moral Absolutes Ping List, please FreepMail either MillerCreek or wagglebee.

15 posted on 01/26/2006 1:47:47 AM PST by MillerCreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iPod Shuffle

At first I couldn't believe he said this but on further reflection it *may* be a wise move. If the populace rejects assissted suicide (which I hope it will) then any politition who fights it will have to do so publicly and jeapordise his political carreer. Same for judges who seek to change the law through judical activism. If that happens there are bound to be lawsuits over it and the people who are pushing it are forced out into the open.


16 posted on 01/26/2006 5:17:09 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson