Friday, 15 April 2011

Bye bye Grandad.

Schools are showing kids a film on assisted suicide. There is much gnashing of hair and rending of teeth over this because there are those who believe this will encourage their children to stick their heads into gas ovens and send their gas bill through the roof.

No, no, no, silly parents. They are not training your kids to kill themselves. They are training them to kill you.

When you are old and infirm, unreasonably insisting that a fraction of all those pension contributions you paid in is now paid out, costing the taxpayer and the NHS money and being a burden on your family, your children will know that it is perfectly okay to 'help' you die. How can you possibly be enjoying life with unlubricated joints and unironed skin? They have pitied you as you wheeze your way up six flights of stairs and shaken their heads at your non-Cosmo face and figure.

"It's okay Grandad, this will help you sleep. Don't worry, I learned all about it in school".

I told you children were inherently scary, didn't I?

I wondered why the Cameroid promised higher pensions for future pensioners. It's because he's not expecting there to be any.

Could such a thing ever be accepted by the public? Well, from the comments...

Good we need some population control. - Rick, Coventry, 15/4/2011 22:57

Why are pupils being shown this film, especially aged 14 - a vulnerable age? I feel it is ok for a teacher to talk about this and discuss with a class - but to show a video? - Claire, London, 15/4/2011 22:59

Claire doesn't like the video but the subject is just fine. The next one has fallen for the old distraction trick -

"church leaders" Do we honestly care what they think and have to say? It's the equivilant of asking someone from Pixar to give us life guidence. - Voice of Reason and Sanity, A euro country, as Britain should be., 15/4/2011 23:14

This loony calling himself 'the voice of reason and sanity' has knee-jerked into 'Well if the Church is against it, I'm all for it'. The depth of his lunacy is evident in his signature, so we'll excuse his auto-response because he's an indoctrinated drone and to be pitied even as the guillotine falls.

Only one of these three openly supports assisted suicide but none are against it.

I'm not against it in principle either. However, I certainly don't want the State in control of it and I am very much against having it portrayed as the normal way to end life. There are cases where people are in such pain and distress from an incurable illness that they might just want the same dignity we afford dogs - a swift end. But they are few. Yes, they should have that right, but when the State is involved in anything it doesn't take long for the voluntary to become compulsory.

Looks like our government have finished reading '1984' and have moved on to 'Logan's Run'.


Something just occurred to me. Bear in mind that I write horror fiction so I think along these lines most of the time.

There is only one way out of the National Insurance PONZI scheme without causing a civil war. Here it is.

Raise the retirement age to say 70, where most people start to get a bit ill and it's also 'three score years and ten', something familiar to most people.

Starting now, train the children that it's okay to 'off' the elderly if they are infirm. It's for their own good.

As this progresses, the bar for the definition of 'infirm' becomes lower as the really seriously infirm have already been eradicated. Eventually everyone of 70 and older has at least something that would class them as infirm. The few who are still sprightly at this age don't matter at this stage, they are a tiny minority.

As these children reach old age themselves, they are already well used to the idea that getting old is something terrible and to be feared and that the sleep clinics are the far better option. People are scared witless of all kinds of ailments now. This next step will be really easy.

Within one generation, two at most, it will be perfectly normal to regard 'retirement' as something closer to the Mafia/CIA definition than the one we're used to.

So when you get to 70, three generations from now, you will enter the sleep clinic without protest. It's the normal way to die.

Then there's no payout for pensions at all. The PONZI scheme ends. Naturally, the NI contributions continue because they've already been absorbed into income tax so nobody notices them any more.

Can't happen? Go back ten years or so and imagine how you'd have responded if you were told that smoking would be banned in every pub in the land, smokers would not be allowed a shelter from the elements, and that 'obese' will mean that your waist is an inch bigger than your inside leg measurement. Honestly, how would you have reacted?

You'd have said 'Tinfoil hat', wouldn't you?

Next on Parliament's reading list: Soylent Green.


winston said...

It sounds more like Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World'.
Guaranteed good life up until aged 50 then put to sleep by an overdose of soma ( I think )

A jones said...

Naturally the process extends to the elite.

Or will there be a price mechanism to the process. I.e. a logorithmic increase in taxation for each year you age.

More money...more years....

Just like now...

Leg-iron said...

Winston - Close, but without the 'guaranteed good life' part.

A Jones - The elite will no doubt endure the horror of old age in order to serve the people. For this personal sacrifice they will be rewarded.

At least, that's how I'd write it. If it was fiction.

Bill Sticker said...

You know Leggy, in the MSS I'm on the home stretch of finishing, the bad guys are called 'Gaians' who recycle Political Dissidents and other superfluous members of society into 'Go-Quarn', a Tofu like substance given out to the drones as part of a 'Healthy Vegetarian diet'.

I'm feeling so prescient it's spooky.

Anonymous said...

In all these scenerios you will have to bring back the death sentence. Otherwise the logical thing is to kill the chilren and the state will have to look after you forever.

JuliaM said...

Slippery slope? What slippery slope..?

Barnacle Bill said...

It will be even more worrying when you will be able to get "assisting" kits over the counter with-out a prescription!

Anonymous said...

Slowly, slowly the worth of a person is being redefined as their cost or even potential cost to the treasury. Sometimes referred to as "society". Note how every argument is referenced around money and how the masses are quick to agree when they perceive a cost to themselves. Smokers cost you billions a year, drinkers cost you billions, obese cost you billions etc. Age has a way to go yet as they are not being collectivised but the diseases of old age have joined the smokers as unsustainable. Alzheimer's for instance. Look up the costs associated it dwarfs the rest combined.

I can see a time when everybody must have an annual cost / benefit analysis as part of a medical check up. Then it will evolve into a potential cost / potential benefit analysis. Increased life expectancy will be used to move retirement out of reach for the majority, move it far enough until some other condition appears, one that attracts termination.

Anonymous said...

Check out George Soros and RWJF and euthanasia.

There is a huge amount of information available.

Maturecheese said...

Soylent Green. Now there's a film, It sure scared me when I was a kid and saw it at the pictures. Good job I was living overseas or I would have been reminded every time the bin man came around.

The way the food industry is it wouldn't be a surprise for something along those lines to occur.

Simon Cooke said...

I wrote this a while back:

My Mum spent 25 years and more working with old people in and around Penge – delivering meals-on-wheels, driving the mini-buses and running Penge & Anerley Age Concern’s lunch club and day centre on Melvin Road. In this time she saw every sort of folk – from Mr Squirrel who worried that he couldn’t (at 96) dig the garden as in times past to Dr Arnott, communist party member, academic historian and employer of a maid.

"Every day, my Mum would tell us, one or more of the people she saw would proclaim – in that depression of loneliness so common among the old and infirm – “I’m just a burden, I’d be better off dead”, or some similar formula of despair. Mum’s response would be to tell them not to be so silly, have a cup of tea and a chat."

Mercy killing merely allows for greedy, cruel relations (and maybe the state) to get rid of incumbrances to inheritance.

Snowolf said...

It reminds me of that old original series Star Trek episode where the two planets are at war.

Rather than go to the expense of actually building missiles and firing them off, they ensure the war can go indefintely by conducting it electronically with the citizens being selected at random to walk into the disintegration chambers.


Stewart Cowan said...

Part of the overall agenda is to destroy the family. (“Destroy the family, you destroy the country” – Lenin).

This is why everything is being done to this end – to try to destroy all natural human bonds: husband and wife; children and parents; children and grandparents, etc.

If you can convince the children that their grandma and grampa are too old and decrepit to be allowed to live, they will despise them for using the earth's precious resources - another part of the brainwashing cycle.

And weakening all these bonds must weaken and eventually destroy society. That's the whole point.

The aim is to discredit such notions as fidelity and chastity and even love, which are no use when causing dysfunction is the aim.

For this reason, schools promote:

Sex education where all the emphasis is on sex and not on love and marriage and raising a family. They promote sex, that’s all. That’s why the “safer sex” manta is so important. Throw contraception at teenagers to get them “at it” so that the dysfunction increases.

Feminism has also caused untold damage to society. Again, the plan was to convince women that “equality” meant that they should be out working. Family was secondary or starting one "could wait." Sometimes the economic conditions also necessitate women going to work full-time where this wasn’t the case in the male dominated world of a few decades ago. The wives, grandparents, neighbours, etc. looked after the family. Now the kids get put into care for the day. Of course, this not only splits the family up, but also exposes the youngsters to increased state propaganda.

The homosexual agenda – again, by normalising same-sex attraction and behaviour, the youngsters are led to believe that sex is the be all and end all and this belief will lessen their chances of starting a family.

Children are being taught to distrust their families and neighbours, such as through the painting of all men as paedophiles or encouraging pupils to surreptitiously snitch on their parents via school projects.

Inevitably, the agenda will lead to the old and sick being culled. As Julia says, it’s a slippery slope.

Abortion was meant to end a few back street abortions, now there are nearly 200,000 a year in Britain.

Homosexuality was decriminalised over 40 years ago. Now, "gay" pressure groups have access to schools encouraging teachers to let the boys ponce around in frocks waving pompoms to "express their feminine side."

Slippery, slippery slopes.

Give an agenda an inch and it will keep on going.

And that’s another part of the agenda – encouraging boys to be effeminate and infantilising men to be weak and subservient. This, like homosexuality, is against the natural order – against God’s will – contrary to the success, strength and safety of society.

The whole picture becomes clearer all the time.

Anonymous said...

I think that you're absolutely right, L-I. This is the start of a long campaign to normalise assisted suicide and euthanasia so that they're seen as not only acceptable but the right thing to do.

We have an enormous problem in an increasing ageing population with a relatively small pool of taxpayers/wealth generators. Although the elderly with even modest assets are required to fund their own care, those modest assets are exhausted fairly quickly. Murder has already been committed by a beneficiary of an estate who saw her inheritance fast disappearing to pay for the nursing home. State/society-approved murder of the elderly is a gift to those who see the old as nothing other than a useless inconvenient cost.


Angry Exile said...

Nobody going to mention Logan's Run? Oh well...

I'm all for assisted suicide in that personally I don't intend to molder and floating away into the dark courtesy of drugs provided by someone who knows what they're doing is cleaner than redecorating the ceiling with a couple of pound or so of brain and an ounce of lead shot. The second option should be nice and quick but I feel sorry for whoever has to come and pick up the bits.

What I do oppose is the idea that the government should get to control it. It would be the flip side of the situation we have right now and just as unsatisfactory. At the moment governments insist on the proles staying alive even if they don't want to, and I don't see that as being significantly better than the sci-fi scenarios in which they tell the proles when they must die. In both cases the lives and bodies of individuals are ultimately not their own but the state's.

What I'd like to see is government simply standing aside - it doesn't provide death services and doesn't even guarantee that any will be available, but it no longer obstructs people from seeking out someone who can tell them what to drink and how much of it. The only other involvement it should have is to investigate and prosecute in cases where the suicide was at all unwilling.

Macheath said...

Moving from the state to private funding, I have a relative in a care home (in body, at least; his mind departed this planet long ago) on whose behalf I pay £1000 a week from the ever-diminishing inheritance he once intended to leave to his family.

The proceeds from the sale of his house are almost exhausted - meanwhile, the next generation are racking up huge student debts.

Being a principled sort, it never occurred to me to hasten his demise and save the cash, whether by direct action or simply choosing a less salubrious home for him.

However, as Anon has pointed out, others may not be so selfless, particularly when thus informed and educated...

Snakey said...

Captain Picard (otherwise known as Sir Patrick Stewart) also approves.

Shinar's Basket Case said...

"Now the publican's anxious for the quota to come
There's a faraway look on the face of the bum
The maid's gone all cranky and the cook's acting queer
What a terrible place is a pub with no beer" should probably worry me that I still know all words to that song..

Mr Ecks said...

If they have us oldies "Marked for Death" Leg-Iron then the firm of Messrs Bird and Moat point the way. With however,in future,a properly applied selection of truly deserving clients, each aging person can end their days in dignity with the assurance that they have done much to make life better for those left behind.
And of course, if there is an afterlife, one will need servants.

opinions powered by