State termination denied in the U.K.

Tweet

Last year the UK parliament had an emotional vote on a law to allow assisted dying for adults with terminal illness. Under the old Prime Minister they voted 315 for and 291 against. It then had to past through the House of Lords, the second chamber of legislation here. The Lords filibustered it and it didn't pass. They added 2000 plus amendments to run the clock down on it so it couldn't pass. It didn't. Under the new PM it was introduced again this summer with some amendments and this time it did not pass in parliament , for 269, against, 286. 87 MPs abstained for various reasons. This time the PM didn't chose to vote or make his feelings clear on how he would have. Seeing the shock turnaround on this vote yesterday it's yet more evidence some MPs had not voted in good faith on such an important issue last time. Was it another example of plotting against the old Prime Minister to land this legislation on him so if it went wrong they could blame him? Why did so many change their mind or not vote this time? Im ambivalent on this law because if the government has the right to allow the state to euthanasie you, when you request it, and of sound mind they could quickly manipulate that situation. Overpopulation is out of control and retirees are just not that productive to the state, especially if they have illnesses like terminal cancer and dementia. It's an opportunity to help a few on their way, all their state pension money going to the treasury. In Canada 5% of all deaths are now done by the state.