Home NZ Politics Euthanasia referendum

Euthanasia referendum

Author

Date

Category

New Zealanders will likely be asked to decide whether euthanasia should be legal in a referendum at the 2020 election after a tight vote in Parliament.

David Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill was amended on Wednesday night to include a binding referendum on whether it should come into force, by a knife-edge vote of 63 to 57.

The referendum is not certain as the bill still has to make it through a third reading vote next month.

But the referendum gives it a much higher chance of passing as it keeps NZ First on board with the legislation.

Finally, they have made the correct decision. Just hope the god botherers don’t scupper this in the final reading

17 COMMENTS

  1. Two referendums during the general election for dope and death, will there be more? Should there be more and what should they be?

    0

    0

  2. Of concern to those who don’t want to live the rest of our lives under a Labour/Green coalition is the way National MPs voted. 40 against vs 15 in favour. This when they seek to govern a country where the clear majority want a form of assisted suicide. (3:1 in favour)

    Main stream NZ is not overly religious, nor is it socially conservative. National ignores these facts at their peril.

    0

    0

    • “Two children, aged nine and 11, have become the world’s youngest to be euthanised, according to a report.

      The unnamed minors were administered lethal injections in Belgium, which has the world’s only law allowing terminally ill children in “unbearable suffering” to choose to die.”

      There maybe a 3:1 majority in favour (I take your word) but it doesn’t mean that the question included this in it.

      0

      0

      • I have huge reservations about Euthanasia laws. One of them is that slippery slope thing we’ve seen time and again with other social engineering.
        I am usually told there is no slippery slope and I should produce evidence.
        Read HPs post above.
        Euthanising children isn’t allowed under Seymour’s bill.
        But it will be in time.
        Watch this space.

        0

        0

      • Good there are too many kids in the world and they were in agony.

        Why should kids be tortured to death so religious zealots will feel smug?

        0

        0

        • Actually the religious zealot description is inaccurate in my case, and is just another of the stupid labels used in place of sound reason ( like climate denier).
          I accept that I am numerically on the losing side of this debate and the bill probably has enough support to pass to law, but I am entitled to voice caution without unjustified personal abuse, however obliquely it is delivered.

          0

          0

          • ……”the religious zealot description is inaccurate in my case”…..

            You would be one of few. The anti euthanasia debate has, along with abortion & marijuana, been derailed by religious conservatives who can feel control of society slipping through their hands. It seems that in your case you have been unjustly associated with them.

            The reason the religiously addled are taunted on this & other non censored sites is that their bullshit faith has rendered them impervious to reason.

            0

            0

            • Nope. Still a ‘climate denier’ argument.
              Are you certain that National’s MPs are voting on religious grounds when you might be ascribing that motive to them unjustifiably?

              It seems to me that there is plenty of evidence anecdotal and empirical that euthanasia legislation relaxes over time.
              I am comfortable with consenting adults making their own decisions, but every situation is different and the law must be there to protect the not-so-willing.

              Does your right to choose assisted dying trump my right to choose not to?

              I fear:
              Terminal illness will include less tangible disorders like depression or quality of life issues like dementia.
              The decider will move from the patient to the doctors, to the family.
              Euthanasia guidelines will become greyed into eugenics.
              Consent will not be necessary.
              Motives will become less altruistic.

              Remember when men were allowed by law to beat their wives who had no option but to stay in abusive homes, and illegitimate children were removed from their ‘fallen’ mothers? Along came the DPB.
              The exploitation of women was traded for exploitation of the taxpayer.

              Remember when homosexual men were imprisoned?
              We outlawed that discrimination and now we have the alphabet community demanding separate bathrooms for all.

              I’m not against change for good.
              I’m just not so sure some folk can see what’s good and what’s not and I don’t trust lawmakers present or future to get it right when their track record is so poor.

              0

              0

              • Part but not all of your reservations occur because society is not static. IOW law is always playing “catch up” with the people who have to live with it.

                Organised religion has learnt to manipulate the divide in order to retain its grip.

                I well remember your instances of the DPB & homosexual law reform with their unwanted side effects but it is not for our generation to set in stone the mores of people ten or fifty years hence. In fact it assures the bloodshed that comes from excessive conservatism balanced later by a rush of ill considered progression.

                …..”I’m just not so sure some folk can see what’s good and what’s not”…..

                Fair enough. But consider also that theocratic conservatism produces societies like those of Islam & the compassion you seek isn’t there either. Empathy comes from within…….not via compulsion through legislation.

                0

                0

    • nasska did National look to the Old or the New Testament for that policy advice?

      And will they continue to stone people to death who gather sticks on the sabbath?

      0

      0

  3. Binding referenda is the main reason I supported NZF not that Peters was some sort of messiah. I am not changing back to NZF but have and will make my views clear about MPs who only support binding referenda when it suits them.

    I know I am going against human nature. Most people do not like to give up power be they MPs, judges, police or union leaders.

    0

    0

Comments are closed.

Recent posts

White supremacists believe in genetic ‘purity’ (Look I found Paddy G)

White supremacists believe in genetic ‘purity’. Science shows no such thing exists By Dennis McNevin: Far-right white supremacist ideology is on the rise in Europe, North America and Australia....

A sensible leader say no to migration pact

ORBÁN REJECTS MIGRATION PACT, SAYS EU WANTS TO ‘MANAGE MIGRATION’ NOT STOP IT VICTORIA FRIEDMAN: The central European Visegrád group has criticised the European Commission’s planned...

Cancel culture. What is it?

The real cancel culture There’s definitely a space where free speech has been curtailed. It’s called the workplace. Steven Parfitt: ‘Cancel culture’ is the latest buzzword in...

Bond lives on.

Tom Hardy has reportedly been cast as the next James Bond. ELIAS MARAT Tom Hardy has reportedly been picked to represent Britain’s most well-known spy, James...

Recent comments

Maggy Wassilieff on Have Your Say
rightoverlabour on Have Your Say
rightoverlabour on Have Your Say
rightoverlabour on Have Your Say
rightoverlabour on Have Your Say
waikatogirl on Have Your Say
waikatogirl on Have Your Say

The way we all feel about this useless government

Hamilton
scattered clouds
14 ° C
14.4 °
13.3 °
66 %
10.3kmh
43 %
Tue
13 °
Wed
13 °
Thu
15 °
Fri
15 °
Sat
17 °
NZD - New Zealand Dollar
USD
1.5247
EUR
1.7794
AUD
1.0793
CAD
1.1400
GBP
1.9600
JPY
0.0145
CNY
0.2238
INR
0.0207