We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Lex Vinicia de Euthanasia
Details
Submitted by[?]: Factio Republicana Socialistica
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 4431
Description[?]:
| Vinician Law on Euthanasia Senators, Perhaps the greatest threat to democracy in contemporary society is "procedural liberalism", governing the political thought of most conservatives, libertarians, and liberals, and based on the belief in the rights of citizens as free and unencumbered selves to choose their own values and purposes. This view leads to the unraveling of democracy and turning liberty into a selfish and private affair and is based on a distorted and false understanding of human nature. We in the Republican Party on the other hand propose Republicanism as the cure to this liberal disease, emphasizing the difficulties in achieving self-government and dedicated to the development of citizens endowed with the character, virtue, moral ties, and solidarity that are absolutely essential for democracy. Procedural liberalism issues the false and utopian claim of being absolutely neutral in regards to the ultimate goods in life, while Republicans affirm that at least a minimum of common norms and ideals, backed by the prerequisite virtues, is essential in securing democratic self-government. As such we find that the question of balancing competing rights and accommodating the interests of dying people while protecting against abuses is a false way to think about end of life care. We believe that a better question is how euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide affect the manner in which people think about life and death, about suffering, about their duties to themselves and others, and about the obligations of children towards their ill parents or of parents towards their children, and of family and society towards the severely disabled. We thus find that euthanasia is a matter that affects not only the terminally ill, but the entire fabric of society and the virtues necessary for democratic self-governance. It is no accident though it is often ignored that opposition to our current euthanasia law is not led by politicians or the religious right, but it is led by disability rights groups. This is because euthanasia distorts our communal understanding of disability and causes us to unwittingly proclaim that some lives are worth living while the lives of the terminally ill and the suffering are not. When a healthy person announces that they wish to end their life, we mobilize all resources at our disposal to provide all the care we can in order to dissuade them from such an extreme action. But when a disabled person makes such an announcement, instead of support in reversing this decision they are greeted with an understanding nod of approval and they are provided the legal means to end their life. This social attitude and our legal system establish suicide as an acceptable and perhaps even expected response to disability and terminal illness, ignoring that other factors, such as poverty or alienation, can also cause unspeakable suffering. And yet we encourage suicide for the disabled and we attempt to prevent it for those suffering from other causes. If I were to try to end my own life because my husband left me or because my son died, I will be treated differently from a terminally ill person, even though my own suffering may in fact be greater. And this ignores the fact that the most commonly cited causes for choosing physician-assisted suicide are not related to suffering. The causes cited all relate to experiences of disability, such as loss of autonomy, loss of dignity, loss of control over bodily functions, or feelings of being a burden. And this distorts our views and attitudes towards disabled people. For these reasons we call for the introduction of a full ban on doctor-assisted suicide as our party has proposed before. With the passing of this bill active euthanasia shall be legally classified as aiding and abetting suicide. Should the suicide have taken place, the offence shall be punishable by no less than 3 years and no more than 8 years of imprisonment. If the act is committed against a minor below the age of 13, or a person lacking the ability to realize the consequences of their actions or inactions, and the suicide has taken place, the offence shall be punished by no less than 10 years and no more than 20 years of imprisonment. If the act is committed against a minor over the age of 13, or a person with diminished mental capacity, and the suicide has taken pace, the offence shall be punished by no less than 5 and no more than 10 years of imprisonment. If the action of aiding and abetting suicide was followed by an unsuccessful suicide attempt, the penalties prescribed above shall be reduced in half. Omission to provide life-sustaining medical treatment is lawful with the consent of the patient. If the patient is mentally incapable of consent, failure to provide life-sustaining medical treatment shall be classified as involuntary euthanasia. Iennifer Vinicia Opis Consul |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The right to euthanasia.
Old value:: Euthanasia is allowed with consent from the patient and the treating doctor.
Current: Euthanasia is allowed with consent from the patient and the treating doctor.
Proposed: Euthanasia is illegal but not considered murder.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribeVoting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 196 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 384 | ||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 170 |
| Random fact: In general, role-play requires the consent of all players. |
| Random quote: "If homosexuality is a disease, let's all call in queer to work. 'Hello. Can't work today; still queer.'" - Robin Tyler |