Government

Ga. Court Says Law Banning Assisted Suicide Ads Violates Free Speech

ATLANTA (The Blaze/AP) — Georgia’s top court struck down a state law that banned advertising for assisted suicides — a measure that sought to prevent this type of suicide without expressly banning it — siding on Monday with four members of a suicide group who said the law violated their free speech rights.

Georgia Court Overturns Law Banning Assisted Suicide AdvertisementsThe Georgia Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling found that the law violates the free speech clauses of the U.S. and Georgia constitution. It means that four members of the Final Exit Network who were charged in February 2009 with helping a 58-year-old man with cancer die won’t have to stand trial, defense attorneys said.

(Related: Check out this Blaze post on a U.K. man with locked-in syndrome seeking his “right” to die)

Georgia law doesn’t ban assisted suicide as whole, but a law made in 1994 bans people from publicly advertising suicide. The law makes it a felony for anyone who “publicly advertises, offers or holds himself out as offering that he or she will intentionally and actively assist another person in the commission of suicide and commits any overt act to further that purpose.”

The court’s opinion, written by Justice Hugh Thompson, found that lawmakers could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction of free speech, or sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide that were followed by the act. But lawmakers decided to do neither, he said.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has more from Thompson:

“Had the state truly been interested in the preservation of human life … it could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction on protected speech whatsoever,” the ruling said. “Alternatively, the state could have sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide when accompanied by an overt act to accomplish that goal. The state here did neither.”

“The State has failed to provide any explanation or evidence as to why a public advertisement or offer to assist in an otherwise legal activity is sufficiently problematic to justify an intrusion on protected speech rights,” the ruling said.

State attorneys said they were reviewing the order. The network’s members said they were thrilled with the decision.

“This was politically motivated and ideologically driven as opposed to being, in any way, motivated by sound legal practice,” said Ted Goodwin, the group’s former president and one of the four defendants. “I‘m just sorry that as many people have been put through what they’ve been put through in what turned out to be a boondoggle.”

Georgia Court Overturns Law Banning Assisted Suicide Advertisements

Ted Goodwin in 2010. (Photo: John Spink/Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

The challenge was brought by four members of the network who were arrested in February 2009 after John Celmer’s death at his north Georgia home. They were arrested after an eight-month investigation by state authorities, in which an undercover agent posing as someone seeking to commit suicide infiltrated the group. Prosecutors say group members helped Celmer use an “exit hood” connected to a helium tank to kill himself.

A grand jury in March 2010 indicted Goodwin, group member Claire Blehr, ex-medical director Dr. Lawrence D. Egbert and regional coordinator Nicholas Alec Sheridan. The four pleaded not guilty to charges that they tampered with evidence, violated anti-racketeering laws and helped the man kill himself, and their case has been on hold while the Georgia Supreme Court considered their challenge.

The four hired a host of well-known defense attorneys, who challenged the law in court. They claimed lawmakers should have adopted a law specifically outlawing assisted suicide if the government was interested in preventing it. Instead, they said, the law only punishes those involved in assisted suicides if they speak publicly about it and does nothing to block one from being carried out by those who stay silent.

State attorneys said the law doesn’t infringe on the free speech rights of people who support assisted suicide, but only those who take concrete steps to carry one out.

Voters in Oregon and Washington have legalized doctor-assisted suicide, and Montana’s Supreme Court determined that assisted suicide is a medical treatment. But most other states adopted laws that call for prison time for those found guilty of assisting suicides. Georgia’s law carried a punishment of up to five years in prison for those found guilty of assisting in suicide.

Opponents of assisted suicide measures said they are concerned the court’s ruling could open Georgia to more assisted suicides.

“I think it will be seen as fertile ground for groups that have spearheaded assisted suicide movements,” said Rita Marker, executive director of Patients Rights Council, an advocacy group that opposes assisted suicide measures. “And from the standpoint of vulnerable patients, this is not a good thing.”

 

Comments (68)

  • I Aint PC
    Posted on February 7, 2012 at 7:06pm

    Here is the next step in this progression. A hitman or “murder for hire” agent places an ad. They get hired for a “job”. Can they get off with claiming it was an “assisted suicide”?

    Report Post »  
  • vaman
    Posted on February 7, 2012 at 3:10pm

    Assisted suicide should be completely tolerated at all levels. Just because you think YOUR morals are better than others or because YOUR god doesn’t like the idea, is not an acceptable reason to stop a suffering person from reaching out for assisting in ending life. It’s their life…not yours. So don’t worry about it. Mind your own business and stop butting into the lives of others. I would think all of the libertarians and small government “conservatives” on the website would agree.

    Report Post »  
  • Jenny Lind
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:19pm

    SGTB, I get it, have watched some of my love ones suffer and die. In my opinion there is no such thing as to much meds, even if it speeds death in the suffering. A decision between family should trump law. They are the ones watching someone suffer, and I believe God is on their side. He is compassionate, while many here are not, but they may learn as you have-the hard way. I am truly sorry for baddoggie’s experience, but I wonder what his father would have said. I think it’s his grief speaking, and for that I am sorry. Others here have no experience-yet.

    Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:46am

      From watching my uncle and my grandfather in less than a year, I can tell you that a good family is better than any gov’t law or intervention. My grandfather had a living will which his wife neglected to tell his children about until he had been on life support for nearly a week. He worked up until the day he went to the hospital with my father, uncle, and aunt. He spent every day surrounded by his family until the day he died. I am sure that he would rather have gone quickly and without such stress on the family as that is what he expressed in his own writing.

      I think that doggy’s experience was so bad because he had no communication with his father on the subject, and while I can feel for him and his loss, it still is not an excuse to create legislation which ruins the lives of others. I agree totally with you that this is better left as a family decision and more importantly, a personal decision by the person most affected.

      Report Post » SgtB  
  • another mimi
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 8:22pm

    I wonder what libertarian Dr. Ron Paul thinks about legalizing Phy. assisted suicide (like the state of Oregon has)
    Anybody know?

    Report Post »  
  • Free2speakRN
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:46pm

    Where are we at? Soylent Green!

    If somebody wants to kill themselves, buy a gun. You want assisted suicide, get somebody else to pull the trigger. To help, maybe, yeah, along with that, get a little ‘advertising’ for some helping services. A clean head shot, maybe? Show a few pictures, before and after, showing the clock on the wall.

    Not so pretty anymore? Oh wait…………

    Let them die with dignity, starve ‘em to death, like a holocaust victim. All kinds of ways to kill with dignity. Look at the good Dr. Kavorkian. Oh wait, in the end he wanted to live.

    Advertising to help kill somebody is more pathetic than doing it. It‘s a true socialogical ’stamp of approval’.

    You wanna do yourself, do it. Don’t bring me into it in any way, including reading the ‘okay’.

    Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:16am

      Your comment shows your ignorance of the reality that people who commit suicide with the help of their loved ones face. If you think that my uncle who was completely bed-ridden with states of lucidity that were few and far between after fighting cancer and chemo for a few years was able to walk outside his home, let alone drive to the store and buy a gun, then you are truly ignorant. Also, wouldn‘t you rather let someone like my uncle die from an overdose of pain medication so that he doesn’t have to feel the last sting of pain after the hardest 2 years of his life and leave his family with a whole body and without a bloody living room ceiling or to have to scrape their father’s remains from?

      Seriously, you underestimate the severity of some people’s situations and show your ignorance in kind.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Free2speakRN
      Posted on February 8, 2012 at 10:47pm

      SgtB,

      You have no idea of the long suffering death(s) I’ve had in my Immediate Family. Cancer eats you away, slow and fast. The Chemo Treatments’ are worse than the disease. So spare me the “I don’t understand”. I do apologise for the graphic way I may have offended some people. The point is, I talked that way because of the absurdity of ADVERTISING IT. You don’t need to buy a gun! That was the stressing of the point. If you have pills and you want to do it, it’s your choice. You don’t need a doctor for that since they are already on pills. Go on the computer to see ‘overdose’. We start ADVERTISING IT and it starts to become… “‘casual”‘. Before you know it, people get depressed for a few days and their going to clinics to have ‘it’ done. People want ‘Dr. assistance‘ largely for an ’okay’ to do it, the comfort that they aren‘t doing it themselves in the ’decision’. What am I going to do? Stop you?

      I don’t need to drive around with my grandkids in the car, looking up at a billboard saying, “Ready to Go. We’ll be there for You.”

      So again, I apologize for the graphics. I certainly wasn’t downplaying suffering. People tell me I should write a book on it. The point was to Wake people up! This nation is getting so lax in their thinking, we’re in a dream. If somebody wants to go that way, I remain, don’t put it on me and mine.

      Report Post »  
  • CROCK-HANDLER
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:56pm

    So ads to help someone die are ok , but ads to help a homosexual get over there condition can’t be aired , Where’s the ”free speech?”

    Report Post »  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:56pm

    .
    If your dog is sick and dying, or a horse breaks a leg you put them to sleep Right? So what’s the Difference with a Human? Nothing…..

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:18pm

      So when you break your leg……Just dosent seem right to have to shoot you monkey…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • SpankDaMonkey
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:08pm

      .
      I’m waiting for Obama to break a leg playing golf now………….

      BADDOGGY you make another mess on the carpet and your owner might just shoot you….

      Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
  • Simonne
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:47pm

    It is legal so what is the problem. If an adult is dying & in excruciating pain, it is their right. I’ve had excruciating pain but not dying so I can at least understand it even though suicide would not be an option for me.

    Report Post »  
  • Locked
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:25pm

    Huh, I thought suicide was illegal.

    Not in Georgia, at least judging by the court’s explanation:
    “”The State has failed to provide any explanation or evidence as to why a public advertisement or offer to assist in an OTHERWISE LEGAL ACTIVITY is sufficiently problematic to justify an intrusion on protected speech rights,” the ruling said.”

    Emphasis my own. GA’s law tried to slow assisted suicide by banning public announcements for it; the court ruled that if they actually wanted to ban suicide or assisted suicide, they should have done so instead of attacking the free speech of a legal activity.

    Report Post »  
  • Baddoggy
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:20pm

    I could care less if they want to advertise. Go right ahead. HOWEVER If they assist in the suicide then they should be locked up for murder. Free speech does not equate into a right to MURDER someone else. If the person killing themselves want to do it on their own…have at it. It’s the assisting part that translates into killing another human being. Prison time for those folks.

    Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • survivorseed
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:33pm

      death penalty maybe.

      Report Post »  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:34pm

      So I guess that a mother of three and widow that hands her husband a fatal dose of morphine because he cannot get up to get it himself or even roll out of bed due to his body being completely ruined by cancerous growths and year of toxic chemo therapy that failed to kill the diseased cells before destroying his body should go to prison for the rest of her life? Until you have a family member who wishes for death and asks you to help relieve their pain, don’t speak another word on this subject.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:41pm

      No, because nobody attempted to force him to take the pills. Unless of course she misled him as to what the pills were. If he had every intent of killing himself and he did, then she is not guilty of murder.

      The “assisted” part comes from someone performing the killing act at the request of the victim, NOT providing the victim with the means of committing the action themselves.

      Your (erroneous) use of an overly dramatic example in an attempt to play into the emotional guilt of the opposition is a sign of a weak argument in itself.

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:43pm

      I was once a death penalty advocate. As I study the Bible (Old and New Testament) I have come to appreciate life, even for the worst of the worst offenders. I do not think we need to murder even the most hardened criminal. There is always a chance that the person could accept Christ as Savior one day. To kill them may deny that possiblity. I am torn with this though at times. We all want justice…

      I will however defend my property, my family with deadly force if it ever came to that…I guess its a control issue. If i could stop them without killing them I suppose i would. Of course i will be aiming for center mass…oops…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:45pm

      Whoops, read “fatal dose” but not “morphine”, which is obviously not a pill. Point still stands though.

      And if she accidentally gave him a lethal dose of morphine while neither of them wanted him to die, that’s called manslaughter, not murder.

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:46pm

      Yes…she should go to jail…sorry, but murder is murder. The morphine could have just as easily comforted his pain until he dies naturally.

      You think murder is justified? Why dont you ask God? You think he would Ok killing your spouse?

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:55pm

      Raging…Intent is where I would stand on this issue. If she was assisting him in the purpose to kill himself then she should be found guilty. If she was trying to ease his pain and suffering and no intention of killing him then she should never be prosecuted.

      I understand well. My father was in a place where I was told i had to sign to pull the plug. i refused. I was willing to pay the bills and keep him alive until he died natrually. They kept him alive until they loctaed my brother…who signed to pull the plug. Made me sick. They murdered my father and there was NOTHING I could do about it. Where is my justice? The medical community is cold blooded at times…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:55pm

      @Ragingjudge, you assert that my example is erroneous and over dramatic. However, it is not far from the truth. Wasn’t a man recently convicted of murder not because he assisted someone to commit suicide, but because he gave him prescribed medication? I am speaking of the Michael Jackson case. If it was murder for a doctor to give someone a drug, then what protection does a wife have against being tried as a murderer when she knowingly provides her husband with a fatal overdose? The answer is none. It is also not merely an erroneous or over dramatic example. It is a situation from within my own family and until you deal with it for yourself, you can keep your opinions to yourself.

      This is not like an abortion wherein a new life is being created only to be destroyed. This is the end of person‘s life and a last resort to end a loved one’s pain when they are unable to survive on their own and live such a state of constant pain that they are continuously on narcotic pain medication so that they can sleep all day without wailing and writhing.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • AJAYW
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:56pm

      SGTB
      I agree with you, been there. What I can’t understand is how so many people think its ok to kill a unborn child but, if someone wants out of their pain with no hope of better its wrong.

      Report Post »  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:59pm

      @SGTB No she shouldn’t go to prison,nor should anyone else who assists someone in suicide,and these laws against assisted suicide is just the government exercising it’s power over the individual,limiting our freedom and liberty.Who owns your body you or the government?

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:07pm

      Thanks for the support AJAYW and Progressiveslayer! I knew there were other sane and rational people on this site.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:07pm

      So progressiveslayer…lets say you were laying in bed and your wife “assisted” you to die. Should she be prosecuted? Makes no difference if you were ready to die or not. She mudered you. If someone wants to do themselves in …fine…It is the assisting part that is the slippery slope. BTW be a man and stop having your wife do your dirty work…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:22pm

      BADDOGGY Someone wanting assistance in their suicide is probably concerned they would botch the job,leaving the poor soul in even worse shape,so no I don’t think the government should prosecute anyone for helping a loved one end their suffering.

      The governments position is sadistic in wanting someone to suffer so much,I’m not a sadist so I would hope my wife would assist me if I needed it,I’d do the same for her.

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:10pm

      Badddoggy the hardest I could hit the wife with in this particular case is manslaughter. If the man took the drugs with full knowledge that it was a lethal overdose, than she’s not the one who killed him. She only gave him the opportunity to take the action himself. If she GAVE him the dose, then she gets murder.

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:20pm

      @ Progressive…So it’s not sadistic to kill someone? Are you re-tarded? Really man…you can justify murder because someone does not feel good and suffers? Incredible!

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • progressiveslayer
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 7:25pm

      BADDOGGY Watching your father dying in excruciating pain from bone cancer and not ending his suffering is sadistic,hell we have more compassion for a horse than a human,figure that one.

      Report Post » progressiveslayer  
    • Jenny Lind
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 9:07pm

      Guys, mscontin is morphine in pill form. For extremely ill, dying patients it’s either in liquid, or in an IV, or in patches. At the end only liquid, or IV works. How do I know? I take the pill, my husband went through all three as the cancer took his life. If someone gives you some, they cannot really tell if it will end life. People develope tolerance, but the chief reason is you can’t tell when the body is slowly breaking down, and what you think is a correct dose to kill may not be, one you think may not, can. Beating yourself up over giving meds to a dying person is foolish, God is still in charge and only He knows the hour of our coming and our going. My husband chose to quit any further treatment, and he suffered at the end. Even the high doses from the hospice nurse barely worked. I was torn between relief of his suffering and the loss of my love of over forty two years. I would never judge the decision made by another couple, and only God can. The state has no right to either. Oh yeah, there are concentrated types of morphine under different names. Enduring to the end is a tough law to keep.

      Report Post »  
  • tzion
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:18pm

    I think there’s a much bigger problem here. There are actually people who WANT to advertise assisted suicide services? That’s actually legal?

    Report Post »  
    • barber2
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:40pm

      Ha. Assisted suicide ? It may be part of ObamaCare ! Has anyone had time to wade through that massive Center for American Progress piece of legislation ? Cradle to grave….

      Report Post »  
  • Netizen Kane
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:17pm

    Who would like to see advocacy ads promoting the “eradication” of all Marxists in the United States? They wouldn’t say how, what, when, where, why, or specifically who, but that “they” should be just be “eradicated”. One wonders just how long it would take the same cabal of leftists to flip-out, flip-flop, and scream bloody murder over that little exercise of free speech….

    Report Post » Netizen Kane  
  • barber2
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:16pm

    Can’t wait to hear from the Ron Paul / anarchist / atheists crowd. They just hate laws , especially any that have moral overtones….

    Report Post »  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:23pm

      OK here goes…If a person wants to kill themselves, who am I to stop them. If a person wants to assist in that killing, then they go to prison for murdering another human being. Easy peezy lemon squeezy…
      They have free speech…they do not have the right to assist in killing…simple enough even you could understand.

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:34pm

      What Baddoggy said. Nobody has to step on anybody’s foot. Assisted suicide is still murder and should be tried as such.

      Funny thing is suicide is one thing I thought there’d never be a group for, among all the other stupid groups. Figured they’s all be too dead to form a group. Guess I was wrong. Does that make every member a moron since he’s not killed himself yet?

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:48pm

      @ Baddoggy, Once again, unless you are the wife, husband, or parent of a person whose body has been destroyed by cancerous tumors and toxic treatments in a game of chicken with disease, you can keep your mouth shut. For men like my uncle, death was a release from the purgatory that is modern medicine. After undergoing years of treatment, he had only fleeting moments of lucidity and his family had already said their goodbyes to the man who was formerly their father, husband, and uncle. In the end, he was not coherent at all. Not in a coma, but not awake. I don’t know if my aunt gave him a fatal dose of morphine, but I do know that the night after I last visited him, he was dead. All of his nieces, nephews, brothers, and sisters had been by to say goodbye like we all knew it would be his last day. The man in that bed that I said goodbye to was nothing more than a mere shadow of the man who I called uncle. This was a strong man who had played on the Yankees and whose brother, who also played on the Yankees, died while I was in Iraq in 2008.

      While the medical profession would have you believe that keeping my uncle alive as long as medically and scientifically possible is the right thing, I can tell you from experience and the look on his loved ones faces that the certified medical opinion is wrong. You sir, are also wrong. Assisted suicide cannot be considered carte blanche murder.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:11pm

      I do know. My father was terminal. I would not kill him. The medical community did though…All they had to do was find someone to sign a release so they could pull the plug. THAT WAS MURDER.

      But some people like you are a fan of killing I guess…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:25am

      @ Baddoggy, You really think that taking your father off of life support which was artificially keeping his blood flowing and his breath exchanging was murder? That is a poor sick view of reality. When you come to realize that death is inevitable and that to prolong suffering and pain with medical inventions that cannot cure, only maintain, is the real evil, then you will have it figured out. As for me and my family, we will accept our time when it comes and we will go gracefully, not in a flurry of medical debt and suffering.

      If a person has the ability to heal themselves and life support systems give them that ability to return to their life as a functioning member of society and more importantly a family, then they should be used to their utmost. However, the prolongation of a life that will never improve is vanity and selfishness.

      Report Post » SgtB  
  • barber2
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:14pm

    Abortions are fine. Now assisted suicides ? How about some euthanasia throw in to weed out the old, and the less than perfect ? Hitler would be so pleased. Nothing like culling the species of the less than desirable. ( only real problem is : WHO gets to determine this and WHAT standards get used ? ) The Progressives ( think of a better word? ) are getting ” the camel’s nose under the tent.”

    Report Post »  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:35pm

      Barber…If you would read the Constitution you might learn something. Murder is against the law. Free speech is covered in the Constitution. Harming others (like yelling firee in a crowded theatre) is not covered under the Right to free speech because of the damage it does (your speech could cause someone to harm someone with that reaction to that speech).

      Assisted suicide would be illegal because it is murder…The free speech part should be allowed up until they assist in the murder. Telling someone how to kill themselves should not be a crime, but helping them would most certainly be a crime.

      Abortion is murder because the life that is taken does not belong to th emother. The mother and the doctor who kill should be put in prison…of course Roe Vs Wade legalized murder in that case…The solution would be for the mother to have the baby and then if she is still distraught then she should maintain the right to end her own life…without any assistance…

      Freedom is something to live for and something to die for. Not by the hands of others but of your own free will. I cannot take another human being life. But I cannot stop that person from taking their own. I cannot assist them in the murder of themselves or of others…

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:38pm

      “The solution would be for the mother to have the baby and then if she is still distraught then she should maintain the right to end her own life…without any assistance…”

      I like that twist :P

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:04pm

      Please do not group suicide with abortion. They are not one and the same. Abortion is the murder of a fetal human. Suicide is the murder of oneself. You own yourself and to commit murder upon yourself is not a crime. To call suicide a crime would be like saying it is a crime to break your own possessions.

      Now, I know that alot of you bible thumpers say that you do not own your body, but that God does. Well, you are just going to have to live with the fact that not everyone believes in the same things as you and that by law, if someone holds a higher claim on your life than you do, you are a slave. Personally, I’d rather be a free man than a slave to a God. But you can live however you want.

      When a mother chooses to abort her child, she is claiming ownership of another human. That is wrong. In much the same way, you calling suicide illegal is just as wrong because you are not even claiming that God owns the body, but that the government does. This little fact is extremely concerning to people like myself. Out of your beliefs that God owns your body comes the reality of government trying to exercise ownership over my body on your behalf.

      Please try to use your brain and acknowledge the facts that morality cannot be legislated and that all men have certain inalienable rights.

      Report Post » SgtB  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 4:15pm

      So ASSISTING someone in murder is different than killing a baby in the womb? How is that? You do not have the right to kill either! Engage YOUR brain! Murder is murder. Assisting is murdering! Same thing!

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • barber2
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 5:58pm

      BAD: You advise me to read the constitution so I will understand that murder is against the law. Well, if that is is the case, why is abortion legal in this country ?

      Report Post »  
    • Baddoggy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 6:18pm

      @ Barber…It should not be! That is why Roe V Wade should be struck down immediately. But we have a load of panty wasted sissies in our Government along with bleeding heart Liberal dumba@@es that think killing is OK…They do not know what LIFE is…They value it onlyif it can vote for them!

      Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • SgtB
      Posted on February 7, 2012 at 1:36am

      @ Baddoggy, your premise that helping the infirm commit suicide of their own free will and cognizance is equivalent to murder is ludicrous. I can see why your are so upset over this whole situation, apparently your father did not have a living will in place or did not let his wishes for his end of life care be known to you. However, you cannot decide what someone else may do to their own body. In the case of assisted suicide, the person dying is completely approving of the situation. It is not murder. In fact, in the case of my grandfather who passed less than a year before my uncle, his wishes were violated by keeping him alive on the machines that you hold doctors in contempt for removing.

      Conversely, an abortion is done without ever consulting the human who is to be killed. Therefore, it is murder. To call them the same completely ignores the fact that one consents and the other is unable to consent. Also, in the case of a spouse, the contract of marriage gives your spouse the right and responsibility to carry out your wishes in this matter in the event that you are unable to convey your own opinions and wants due to illness. If you do not accept this fact or you don’t trust your wife to know your wishes, then that is your fault and you should either get a new wife or talk to your wife possibly creating a living will which will shield her from having to make these decisions for you.

      Report Post » SgtB  
  • Mateytwo Barreett
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:14pm

    Once again! From the peach state. Who brought you for you entertainment. Han k “Guam is gonna jus‘ tip over and capsize’ Johnson, Cynthia” there is nothing I can’t find SOME racism in” McKineey, John“ride this horse til it falls over dead” Lewis, and everybody’s favorite delusional preaher Joe “white’s gonna do whats right” Lowery.
    For your entertainemnt – this state decided years ago to provide a solution to a problem that does not exist.
    In this case the problems not the lawyers-at least entirely. Its the situation where the law makers have too much time on their hands, and rather than than say- try to find some cost savings lets just make another law! Sooner or later somebody will run into it and BANG!

    Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
  • lukerw
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:13pm

    ‘Soylent Green is now available’!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • caleejr
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:54pm

    Then laws banning Tobacco ads violate it as well.

    Report Post » caleejr  
  • takingonissues.com
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:50pm

    Amen Swampy, the lawyers gotta go. How do we make that happen? http://www.takingonissues.com

    Report Post »  
  • progressiveslayer
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:49pm

    I don‘t need the government to tell me how to live and I don’t need them to tell me how I die.

    Report Post » progressiveslayer  
  • LeadNotFollow
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:44pm

    …
    Isn’t assisted suicide illegal? Advertisements for assisted suicide should be illegal.

    Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:02pm

      No its not in Georgia and the court is clear in its ruling:

      “Had the state truly been interested in the preservation of human life … it could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction on protected speech whatsoever,” the ruling said. “Alternatively, the state could have sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide when accompanied by an overt act to accomplish that goal. The state here did neither.”

      Report Post »  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:17pm

      OUCH! Encino writ(Georgian for wrote) something that I a- ag-agr-agre
      I just can’t say it!

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
    • RagingJudge
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:43pm

      @MATEYTWO I know, it’s a sign of the end times…

      Report Post » RagingJudge  
  • sWampy
    Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:31pm

    We really need to do something about the idiot lawyers in this nation. Your free speech rights end when you start encouraging people to do illegal things period.

    Report Post »  
    • SouthSideLib
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:39pm

      No they don’t

      Report Post »  
    • sWampy
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 2:45pm

      Ever hear the saying about you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater? It’s the same thing. It is a disgrace how uneducated the average American is.

      Report Post »  
    • encinom
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:01pm

      The law in Ga didn’t ban assisted suicides. Read the article.

      “Had the state truly been interested in the preservation of human life … it could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction on protected speech whatsoever,” the ruling said. “Alternatively, the state could have sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide when accompanied by an overt act to accomplish that goal. The state here did neither.”

      Report Post »  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:20pm

      The idiot lawyers? Haven’t they all been elected to some board , office, or congress!

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
    • barber2
      Posted on February 6, 2012 at 3:20pm

      SWAMPY: all of our fine, young anarchists don’t believe in the word ” no.” Mommy never taught them the meaning of it. That is why so many of them are now in the Occupy Movement. They just believe in getting what they want . A political temper tantrum called the Occupy Movement is their lasted venture in self-expression…guess our union members in Wisconsin are just another version. They don’t believe in “no” if they don’t like the election results…

      Report Post »  

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love