Playing with words

Just saying something doesn’t make it true. Obviously.

But the abortion movement has done that for so many years (decades) they’ve marketed the procedure that ends a human life as just a “choice,” a “reproductive right,” a “right to privacy.”

Perception becomes reality when you repeat a lie often enough. Especially when people with power and influence repeat them with seeming authority. They make people of common sense, traditional-minded folks, reconsider what they thought they knew.

The euthanasia movement has done it again. It was incoherent enough when they took the name “Compassion and Choices.” That all sounds so…good, and caring. Now they’re redefining the terms of death in state law, to make it more acceptable.

A terminally ill patient who ends his or her life under the Oregon Death With Dignity Act will be listed as a “physician-assisted death” instead of suicide

because that makes all the difference, in perception.

The one-word change had been sought by advocates of the landmark state law that allows dying patients to ask their doctors to provide medication the patients can administer to themselves to end their lives, if they are capable of making a sound decision.

“If”?! Who decides that?! What a huge, elastic and very subjective loophole. Doesn’t that clause render the whole thing just inapplicable?

The advocacy group Compassion & Choices said the act, as it is spelled out in Oregon law, “shall not, for any purpose, constitute suicide, assisted suicide, mercy killing or homicide, under the law.”

How convenient. When you’re challenged in the game, change the rules. Or, just the words that make them up.