A few days ago, I wrote about an assisted suicide initiative that recently passed in Washington State. Bollo commented that it seemed as if I was berating Catholics in that post. That really wasn't my intention at all. Because of my daughter's current religious exploration of Catholicism and my own nostalgic feelings about this religion's influence on the culture I grew up around, I often visit websites by and/or for Catholics. That's how I found out about what's going on in Washington State. I tried to make it clear that my suggestions about end of life issues apply to all of us who consider ourselves religious/spiritual/persons of faith.
That post was mostly about my conflicted feelings about assisted suicide. In reality, I think my position is really close to how many Catholics feel about it. I do believe that all life has value and that we shouldn't accept the idea that we should suspend this concept when it comes to people with disabilities.
If society really thinks that assisted suicide is ethical, then why do these laws limit it to those with disabilities? If we really believe that people with disabilities have just as much worth as those who are seemingly non-disabled, then why do people behave as if it's somehow acceptable for doctors to help end our lives but seek to keep it illegal for doctors to end the lives of the non-disabled?
It's not that I'm necessarily against euthanasia. I'm simply against the ablist philosophy that, in effect, says that we should support doctors removing certain kinds of people--disabled people--from society with as much haste as we can convince the doctors and patients to go along with. There's plenty of evidence that the same strategies that help non-disabled people dealing suicidal ideation also work to help many people with disabilities who are experiencing the same feelings.