Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

International

‘Wrong in principle’: Former UK prime ministers torch proposed assisted suicide legislation

Published

3 months ago

8 minute read

A nurse injects medicine for euthanasia to an elderly man in a hospital bed

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

As UK lawmakers prepare to vote on Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide bill, opposition mounts from ex-prime ministers, clergy, and healthcare leaders, who condemn the practice ‘in principle’ while warning of risks to vulnerable patients and flawed safeguards.

At least four former U.K. prime ministers have opposed Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide bill as the Friday vote looms. 

Former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown published his editorial opposing assisted suicide in the Guardian on November 22, revealing that the moments he and his wife spent with their dying infant daughter were among the most precious in his life and calling on Parliament to instead focus on improving end-of-life care. 

According to the Daily Telegraph, former British leaders Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Baroness Theresa May have all expressed their opposition to the deceitfully named Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. May’s opposition to assisted suicide has not changed since she voted against it in 2015, and thus she expects to vote against the Leadbeater bill if it progresses to the House of Lords, according to sources close to May.   

Liz Truss has been forthright in her opposition, telling the Telegraph that she is “completely opposed” to assisted suicide: “It is wrong in principle: organs of the state like the NHS and the judicial system should be protecting lives, not ending them.” Boris Johnson also opposes the assisted suicide bill in its current form, the Telegraph reports. Rishi Sunak is not opposed to assisted suicide “in principle,” but has not stated which way he will be voting; Tony Blair has also thus far remained silent.  

Unfortunately, former prime minister David Cameron has changed his view on assisted suicide, stating that despite his previous concerns that vulnerable people might be pressured to end their lives, Leadbeater’s bill has “strong safeguards.” As several experts have already pointed out, Cameron is wrong about the bill – in fact, the legislation as written is vague, disastrous, and filled with loopholes.  

Indeed, the bill’s sponsor and most aggressive champion, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, has suggested that fear of being a burden is a “legitimate reason” for dying – and the “safeguards,” such as Clause 25, which protects medical professionals involved in assisted suicides from civil liability, reveals who the safeguards are actually for.  

Although the assisted suicide camp still has more confirmed votes, opposition to the bill has been mounting in recent days. The Times condemned the bill, stating in no uncertain terms:  

Legislation sanctioning the killing of human beings, irrespective of life expectancy, is a matter worthy of the most rigorous debate. Ms Leadbeater implied only this week that doctors would be allowed to raise the issue of assisted dying with patients who had expressed no desire for it. Such flippant and ad hoc reasoning behind this most important of bills condemns it.

Even the Church of England has stepped up, with over 1,000 members of the Anglican clergy – including 15 bishops – signing an open letter stating: 

To reduce the value of human life to physical and mental capacity and wellbeing has sinister implications for how we as a society view those who experience severe physical or mental issues.

READ: Euthanasia advocates use deception to affect public’s perception of assisted suicide 

These religious leaders are joined by jurists such as former judge Sir James Munby and former attorney Dominic Grieve. Additionally, 3,400 healthcare professionals, including 23 hospice medical directors and 53 eminent medical professionals, signed a letter stating that Leadbeater’s bill “would threaten society’s ability to safeguard vulnerable patients from abuse.” London Mayor Sadiq Khan also opposes the bill.  

In response, suicide lobby group Dying With Dignity is pouring money into ad campaigns on social media, running 602 Facebook ads in the past month. Supporters of assisted suicide are claiming that a majority of the public supports the bill, and some polls indicate that over 60 percent do. However, as the saying goes, polls are taken to shape public opinion, not gauge it. From the Daily Mail: 

[A new poll] found that when presented with ten basic arguments against assisted suicide – based on experiences from other countries such as Canada where the practice is allowed – support collapses. In this case the proportion of “supporters” who did not switch to oppose or say “don’t know” fell to just 11 per cent, the polling found. Support fell in every social category by between 17 and 49 percentage points.

This poll reveals precisely why Keir Starmer, the U.K.’s first openly atheist prime minister, permitted such an important bill to be so rushed: the more people know, the more they oppose assisted suicide. Let’s hope that the pushback is enough to carry the day.  

Featured Image

Jonathon Van Maren

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture War, Seeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of Abortion, Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life Movement, Prairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Before Post

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 2 hours ago

Next federal government should reverse Ottawa’s plastics ban

Business / 3 hours ago

Trump walks back tariffs on Mexico, Canada for another month

Agriculture / 8 hours ago

Dairy Farmers Need To Wake Up Before The System Crumbles

Business

Trump walks back tariffs on Mexico, Canada for another month

Published on March 6, 2025

By

From The Center Square

By 

Stocks sunk Thursday afternoon despite President Donald Trump’s decision to grant major exceptions to the 25% tariffs he put on Mexico and Canada earlier this week.

All three major U.S. market indexes were in the red by the time of Trump’s afternoon bill signing. Trump said Thursday in the Oval Office that steel and aluminum tariffs were on track for next week without modifications.

Trump shrugged off the stock losses, blaming the decline on “globalists.”

“I think it’s globalists that see how rich our country is going to be and don’t like it,” he said.

Trump has promised that his tariffs would shift the tax burden away from Americans and onto foreign countries, but tariffs are generally paid by the people who import the products. Those importers then have a choice: They can either absorb the loss or pass it on to consumers through higher prices. He also promised tariffs would make America “rich as hell.” And he’s used tariffs as a negotiating tactic to tighten border security.

Trump granted temporary tariff relief to both Canada and Mexico on Thursday by exempting goods under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement from tariffs until April 2.

On April 2, Trump plans to announce broader reciprocal tariffs against countries that impose tariffs on U.S. goods or keep U.S. goods out of their markets through other methods.

Since imposing his latest round of tariffs on top of trading partners this week, Trump has been paring them back. On Wednesday, Trump said the Big Three automakers – Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co. and Stellantis NV – would be exempt from his tariffs for a month.

In February, Trump took a step forward on his plan to put reciprocal tariffs on U.S. trading partners by signing a memo directing staff to come up with solutions in 180 days. Trump previously said he would put those tariffs in place on April 2 to avoid any confusion on April 1.

In his joint address to Congress on Tuesday, Trump said all countries would have to either make their products in the U.S. or be subject to tariffs.

“Whatever they tariff us, we tariff them. Whatever they tax us, we tax them,” Trump said. “If they do non-monetary tariffs to keep us out of their market, then we do non-monetary barriers to keep them out of our market. We will take in trillions of dollars and create jobs like we have never seen before.”

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, governs trade between the U.S. and its northern and southern neighbors. It went into force on July 1, 2020. Trump signed the deal. That agreement continued to allow for duty-free trading between the three countries for products largely made in North America.

U.S. goods and services trade with USMCA totaled an estimated $1.8 trillion in 2022. Exports were $789.7 billion and imports were $974.3 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with USMCA was $184.6 billion in 2022, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Continue Reading

International

Pursuing world peace: Trump’s secret peace talks with Hamas a stunning break from decades of neocon policy

Published on March 6, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

The Trump administration is pursuing a clean break with the approach of the last 70 years. Perhaps the only hope for peace lies in breaking the rules of the old rules-based order.

As Donald Trump publishes a stark warning to Hamas, news emerges that his administration is also engaged in direct negotiations with the militant group to secure a lasting peace deal in Gaza.

A statement released on Trump’s Truth Social account and by the White House reads:

“Release all of the Hostages now, not later, and immediately return all of the dead bodies of the people you murdered, or it is OVER for you. Only sick and twisted people keep bodies, and you are sick and twisted! I am sending Israel everything it needs to finish the job, not a single Hamas member will be safe if you don’t do as I say.”

The statement followed Trump’s meeting at the White House with some of the Israeli hostages released following a deal brokered by his initiatives and led by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff.

 

“We believe you have been sent by God to save us,” Trump was told. Israel media reported hostage relatives asking, “Why does Witkoff (Steve Witkoff, US Envoy to the Middle East) answer us but not our own ministers?”

Trump is credited by the released hostages and their families with saving their lives, whilst Israeli leader Netanyahu has been accused of having “sabotaged” every hostage deal for the past year, with his own national security minister saying Netanyahu “sacrificed the hostages for his own personal interests” in January. The deal to release the hostages was secured because Trump “pressured” Netanyahu into accepting it, Israeli sources say.

Donald Trump’s message to Hamas and to the people of Gaza was stark:

Yet an exclusive report from Axios yesterday showed the Trump administration is also engaged in secret and direct negotiations with Hamas.

“The Trump administration has been holding direct talks with Hamas over the release of U.S. hostages held in Gaza and the possibility of a broader deal to end the war, two sources with direct knowledge of the discussions tell Axios.”

The White House confirmed the historic move.

Direct talks with Hamas were described by Reuters as having broken a “long- standing diplomatic taboo,” with their report also noting the Israeli response to the news.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office issued a statement saying: ‘Israel has expressed to the United States its position regarding direct talks with Hamas.’ It did not elaborate but Israel, which along with many other countries considers Hamas a terrorist organization, refuses to negotiate directly with the group.”

The pursuit of direct bilateral talks with the “enemy” here mirrors the approach pursued by the U.S. in reopening and normalizing diplomatic channels with the Russians – suspended by the Biden administration for around three and a half years.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier this week it was notable that “normal conversation” had resumed between his nation and the U.S.

 

The return of direct diplomacy is a signal that the Trump administration is serious about peace, and whilst stressing its power to respond with overwhelming in force in both theaters of war, has been willing to engage with the Russians and with Hamas to break the deadlock.

This is a significant departure from the decades of policy which produced escalation, emergencies, and periodic wars in place of rational compromise and peace.

Israeli commentator Ori Goldberg, a former academic in Middle East Studies, framed the situation as a choice between a leader who is for peace, and another who is for war.

 

Trump’s direct threats in public are partnered with direct negotiations in private, with the goal seemingly to return hostages and remove the leadership of Hamas from Gaza. It is likely these negotiations will feature the vastly higher number of Palestinian hostages held by the Israelis, whose appalling treatment has included rape with metal rods – a practice endorsed in the Israeli parliament and discussed favorably on Israeli daytime TV.

The ultimatum to Hamas follows Trump’s “Mar-A-Gaza” plan for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip along the lines of a holiday resort, which would seemingly entail the mass expulsion of the Palestinian population.

In response to this proposal, which has been met with widespread condemnation and outcry, Arab leaders have produced an Egyptian-led counter-proposal for the future of Gaza, involving $35 billion of Arab-led investment. This plan, rejected by the Israelis, would see Egypt assume security supervision of Gaza in place of Hamas, and would permit the Palestinians to remain in Gaza as reconstruction is undertaken. U.S. national security spokesman Brian Hughes said the plan, which will be presented to Trump in the coming weeks, did not recognize that Gaza was now “uninhabitable.”

Meanwhile, the crisis flowing from Netanyahu’s actions – and inaction – undertaken to consolidate his grip on power continues to develop. Controversy over the failings of the Israeli government and army to prevent the October 7 attacks continues to deepen.

The new IDF (Israeli army) chief of staff, ignoring Netanyahu’s strong opposition, has ordered a “re-examination” of the army’s actions during the October 7 attacks. The previous army chief, Herzi Halevi, has resigned – citing his and the Netanyahu government’s failure to protect Israelis.

Netanyahu “dismissed” a warning from Shin Bet, the Israeli security service, issued five months in advance of the attacks, as Haaretz reports. Whether Netanyahu deliberately sabotaged the hostage deal, or refused to act on warnings about October 7, the Israeli leader is beset with questions he refuses to answer.

He is increasingly being seen, inside and outside Israel, as the main problem, being implacably opposed to any attempts to find solutions that would give several decades oppressed Palestinians any new rights and their own state.

Having been in power for most of the last 16 years, Netanyahu can be charged not only with corruption, but with having managed Israel into what has become an existential crisis the tiny nation has never before experienced to this degree. His political future, very similar to that of also corrupt, Jewish Ukrainian president Zelensky, appears to be staked on making any lasting peace impossible.

The reality behind the headlines once again reveals the development of a new geopolitical order beneath the sensational chaos of the current news cycle.

The Trump administration is pursuing a clean break with the approach of the last 70 years. That consistent pattern of repeatedly broken agreements, war crimes, propaganda, atrocities, and ruinous regime change has been part of the process intended to sabotage any chance of peace through periodic escalations and a permanent state of emergency punctuated by all-out war.

After decades of politics dominated by an ongoing death machine, perhaps the only hope for peace lies in breaking the rules of the old rules-based order and placing the protection of ALL innocent human lives as the top priority.

Continue Reading

Trending

X