This is not the first time that the Economist has published an article promoting assisted suicide. Several years ago the Economist sent a film crew to Belgium to promote the death of Emily “Laura” who was approved for euthanasia for psychiatric reasons. The Economist produced a short film promoting the euthanasia death of a healthy 24 year-old woman. Thankfully Emily changed her mind and decided to live, possibly in response to our Letter of Hope to Laura.
Now the Economist is using the passing of the Hawaii assisted suicide bill to publish a seemingly neutral article on assisted suicide that in fact promotes assisted suicide. For instance, the article appears factual but only quotes leaders from the assisted suicide lobby. For instance, the Economist reports:
Kim Callinan of Compassion & Choices, a pressure group, believes there are several reasons for the growth in support. Since the first Death with Dignity Act was implemented in Oregon, there has been no evidence of misuse or abuse. In the past few years several high-profile cases have drawn attention to the issue. Perhaps the best known is that of Brittany Maynard, a young Californian woman with terminal brain cancer, who fervently advocated for right-to-die laws until she ended her life in November 2014 in Oregon.
The Economist reports the comments by the assisted suicide lobby as factual, such as – no evidence of misuse or abuse, while no attempt is made by the Economist to question the assisted suicide lobby.
The Economist didn’t investigate why people with disabilities, such as Not Dead Yet, oppose assisted suicide.
- Not Dead Yet testimony opposing Hawaii assisted suicide bill.
The Economist didn’t investigate how the interpretation of the language of the Oregon assisted suicide Act has changed.
SUPPORT PRO-LIFE NEWS! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation to share the pro-life message
Finally, the Economist didn’t examine the latest Oregon assisted suicide statistics.
Maybe support for assisted suicide is based on the amount of information people are given. Rather than publishing propaganda, maybe the Economist should offer authentic research.