Doctors face orders to 'kill on demand' New assisted suicide law requires physicians to act

Physicians in Montana could be facing “kill-on-demand” orders from patients who want to commit suicide if a district court judge’s opinion pending before the state Supreme Court is affirmed.

“The trial court’s decision to create a constitutional right to ‘obtain assistance from a medical care provider in the form of obtaining a prescription for lethal drugs’ threatens the rights of healthcare professionals and institutions that hold sincere ethical, moral, and religious objections to participating in the intentional killing of their patients,”

He told WND that the effort clearly is part of a nationwide agenda to impose and mandate ethical standards on Americans. Similar are the Obama administration’s suggestions that that pharmacists may not have the right to refuse to dispense abortion-inducing medications, and doctors may not have a conscience right to refuse to do abortions, he said.

“I don’t know where it’s coming from, but there is certainly a push from government to tell people to set aside religious or ethical qualms and to abide by whatever the government tells you is appropriate,” he said.

just another assulat from the agents of death against the sancity of life.

:bigyikes: :mad:

Please realize that the title of this thead is the headline of a World Net Daily article. If you read it, you will find out that the headline is actually the opinion of a pressure group which has filed a brief in a court case. In other words, its a distortion of the real situation.

a man wanted physician-assisted sucidie,
the doctor refused
the man sued
the doctor lost
an appeal upheld this decesion that doctors cant refuse

the headline is no distortion. if the state supreme court upholds the previous ruling then doctors in montana will have to participate in assisted suicide.

Everything I have read on the case suggests that the doctor declined to provide assisted suicide because it was not covered by the law. The doctor was not a defendent in the lawsuit. He seems to have been neutral about the matter.

The case is meant to clarify Montana law, not to coerce individual physicians.

It is only common sense that if Montana law goes along with assisted suicide that it WOULD coerce physicians. Don’t be so neive and superfical.geeze!

especially since montana would be the only state with assisted suicide laws and no conscience exemptions. if the lower ruling stands then this would be like cpr something a physician couldnt not do and keep his liscense.

really sucks for the people of montana i see them losing a lot of doctors if this passes. i would like to see other states offer them liscenses and a small stipend to relocate so they dont have to kill their patients.

Please offer some evidence which would support your view. A prior legal precedent, perhaps?

The trial court’s decision to create a constitutional right to ‘obtain assistance from a medical care provider in the form of obtaining a prescription for lethal drugs’ threatens the rights of healthcare professionals and institutions that hold sincere ethical, moral, and religious objections to participating in the intentional killing of their patients

i believe trial decesions count as precedent.

Indeed. But what you quoted was not the trial court’s decision, but the opinion of a spokesman for a pressure group.

and considering that the decesion did go against the doctors right to refuse i think his opinion is about as common sense as it gets. the aclu will be all over the next doctor that refuses if this decesion is upheld.

you seem to think we are addressing this as if it were rampant. it clearly isnt, its just starting, but all abuses have to start somewhere. when roe v. wade came out im sure there were people who DID think it would lead to over 1000000000 abortions in this year alone, partial birth abortion, and doctor being allowed to kill babies that were born alive after surviving the abortion. and just as surely someone said prove it, where is this happening. evil is constantly assulting life in this country. this is just it getting another foothold, and a few doctors and their advocates trying to shut it off before its too late.

The abortion issue shows the path that this will take. Under current legislation (which we are fighting right now) if a doctor believes he would be murdering a child by committing an abortion, he is permitted to refer the patient to another doctor. He is not allowed to refuse outright, however - we are fighting right now for a doctor’s right to refuse an abortion without referring the patient to another doctor.

Thank you for your example. I guess I don’t consider being forced to make a referral (which I think shouldn’t be required, btw) is the same thing as being forced to participate in an assisted suicide.

I see you are from Canada. Is the law you mention which mandates a referral for abortion a Canadian law or a US law?

This is the current Canadian law. Members of the Pro-life movement, including the Catholic Women’s League, are pushing to have this overturned, so that doctors are no longer required to participate even remotely in the killing of any human being.

Suppose a neighbor would knock on my door and ask me: you are a hunter, an army veteran and expert marksman, therefore I would like to hire you to shoot my MIL. Am I allowed to flat out deny “helping” this guy, or should I be required to refer him to someone else who is a thug and has no moral qualms about shooting a human being? :mad: And if I would operate a pharmacy (I’m a pharmacist), and someone would like to buy marijuana or heroin in my pharmacy, am I allowed to just tell him we don’t carry such stuff and leave it at that, or do I have a duty to refer him to a drug dealer on the street corner? :mad: What if he comes in, and wants to buy the abortive drug, the Pill, or poison for assisted suicide from me? Can I just deny dealing with him, or is there a law forcing me to refer him to someone who will assist him with murder? :mad: Liberals and freedom-of-choicers suck. :mad: They are liars and hypocrites, attacking MY liberty and MY freedom of choice, and trying to force me to participate in their crimes. :frowning:

thank you for the examples. i can never understand why the supporters of these things cant grasp that its the same thing every secenario just in a different field.

I apologize to those who subscribe to liberal philosophy and freedom of choice in the historical and true sense of these words. I’m only mad with those who hijacked these words and turned them into oxymorons, trying to force healthcare providers to kill other human beings, and to add insult to injury, they lie and rename what’s a veritable “Coercion of Murder Act” (COMA) into “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA).

I’m also deeply troubled by this. The other day I talked to an MD who has been practicing medicine for more than 20 years, and she couldn’t grasp the simple concept that I don’t want anything to do with abortion and aborted babies, and that it is not fair for the government to enact laws and force me into participating in what I consider as murder, even if she does not regard that as murder and has no moral reservations about it. All I can tell is this, I would rather leave my job and become a truck driver, than become an accomplice to abortion and euthanasia.

I agree. And the liberals always want others to “justify” to them, as if they are the judge and jury. I personally feel I do not have to justify to anyone,unless I think it helps a cause.
If liberals could see beyond their own nose, then they could see cause and effect and History in matters of people wanting to justify killing others. Abortion is an excellent example. And that woman who was murdered in FL who was in a nursing home.
I have heard,from reptable sources,when I lived in FL, that many elderly died because medicines were withheld,but under the carpet,so to speak. I am 52 and chronically ill and now Medicare will not cover medicines I NEED and can not afford. My doctors told me in a couple years I most likely won’t get much medical care or medicine at all. Medicare is constantly changing,monthly, and the changes are all about taking away care. Now women can not get papsmears paid for if on medicare and medicaid. Being that I deal with this all the time, I see what is coming, even if not said in courts or newspapers. My social worker in WI and FL,both told me over the past 5 yrs that the government wants the sick,disabled,elderly dead because it will save alot of money not paying for us. In reality I believe it is to pad their own pockets like usual.
When Obama is done with changing things, there will be no Catholic hospitals because doctors will be made by law to murder.And these same Christian doctors won’t want to go to a County hospital to work because they will not want to do abortions. And what about Christian Pharmacies,what if they are made to sell the PILL,etc. All is done under the gieze of freedom. It is slavery not freedom.Freedom is meant for us to choice good not evil.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit