New York Times Says a Suicide With a Gun is Bad, But an Assisted Suicide With Drugs is Alright

Opinion   |   Wesley Smith   |   Dec 14, 2015   |   8:08PM   |   Washington, DC

The New York Times has editorialized against guns as a way of reducing suicides. From, “To Reduce Suicides, Keep the Guns Away:”

No policy or education campaign is going to prevent every suicide. But that is no excuse for failing to save as many people as we can by improving gun safety and by protecting people who are a danger to themselves.

But if someone has a serious illness, the Times sings a different tune. In fact, the same editorial page has supported assisted suicide for the terminally ill.

Follow on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.

Yet, when it comes to the seriously ill, the Times says nothing about “protecting people who are a danger to themselves,” this despite studies showing that some terminally ill people who want to die are, later, glad they are still alive.

Hence, I can only conclude that NYT editorialists are not against suicide per se–since they support some suicides. Rather, their primary concern is guns and they will use whatever argument they think will work. 

Indeed it may be hyperbole to state–but hyperbole often contains truth–that when it comes to some suicides, the NYT thinks guns are bad, but drug overdoses are good. Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Human Exeptionalism.