Sunday, July 01, 2007

Book Argues "Liberal" Case Against Assisted Suicide


I haven't read Liberalism's Troubled Search for Equality yet, but it looks as if it takes a good approach. Here's the Amazon description:

In Liberalism's Troubled Search for Equality, Robert P. Jones presents a penetrating examination of physician-assisted suicide that exposes unresolved tensions deep within liberal political theory. Jones asks why egalitarian liberal philosophers--most notably, Ronald Dworkin and John Rawls--support legalized physician-assisted suicide in direct opposition to groups of disadvantaged citizens they theoretically champion. Jones argues that egalitarian liberals ought to oppose physician-assisted suicide--at least until we find the political will to ensure access to health care for all. More broadly, Jones challenges progressives to find the heart of the liberal tradition not in allegedly neutral appeals to "choice" but in a renewed commitment to equality and social justice that welcomes public religious voices as allies.
Ever since I got involved in the assisted suicide debate in 1992--in which I first debated Jack Kevorkian's attorney over California's Proposition 161 that would have legalized euthanasia--and more fully in the fall of 1993 when I committed myself to advocating about the issue, I have argued that legalizing assisted suicide is anything but liberal. Indeed, traditional liberalism of the kind on which I cut my political teeth--the liberalism of Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, Ralph Nader--should oppose assisted suicide in that this brand of liberalism looks at "us," rather than myopically at "me," and is dedicated to protecting vulnerable populations. The disability rights movement--which is overwhelmingly liberal politically--gets it and has become the most effective opponents of euthanasia in the country.

So, while I can't endorse the book because I have not read it, I applaud Jones for looking at the issue through the prism of political liberalism.

Labels:

11 Comments:

At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Tony Jones said...

There is nothing "liberal" about limiting access to Nembutal to doctors, vets, the rich and the lucky. The current situation is elitist and unjust.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Gregory L. Ford said...

To quote the Dead Kennedys: "Kill kill kill kill kill the poor."

That is: unless society is already perfectly just, the poor and the weak will suffer the most if euthanasia is sanctioned by the state. Let the rich off themselves if they want.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Tony Jones said...

That's interesting, because rich people are those most likely to make use of the Oregon dying with dignity law.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Aki_Izayoi said...

Regarding equality and liberalism, a book called The Bell Curve is feared by liberals such as myself.

http://www.talkreason.org/articles/coultergeist.cfm

"Only liberals could interpret a statement that people have varying IQs as a call to start killing people."

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Tony Jones said...

HellKaiserRyo: Ann Coulter is indeed a monster.

Conservatives like her violate free will, not liberals. Liberals believe in protecting people from the harmful deeds of others, hence our support of smoking bans.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Gregory L. Ford said...

Off-topic, I know (sorry Wesley): but:

Hence your support of smoking bans, which violate constitutional rights to property and free association. "Liberal" is a misnomer for such busybodyness. I could think of a better word.

There's a philosophical contradiction here: you insist that people have a right to kill themselves with drugs but not with cigarettes. What gives?

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Bernhardt Varenius said...

Tony writes:

Conservatives like her violate free will, not liberals. Liberals believe in protecting people from the harmful deeds of others, hence our support of smoking bans.

As Gregory points out, this is a contradiction. What about the "free will" of smokers to smoke whenever and wherever they want?

In any case, the "liberal" argument against assisted suicide/euthanasia is indeed the same logic as the justification for smoking bans: It has wider ramifications that threaten harm to vulnerable groups.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Bernhardt Varenius said...

Ann Coulter is indeed a monster.

Ridiculous! She's simply yet another professional smartass, of whom there are dozens on both Right and Left.

 
At July 02, 2007 , Blogger Tony Jones said...

Gregory, since smokers choose to smoke, they should be the ones making the concessions. They should not be allowed to callously smoke anywhere they please and give lung cancer to those who don't want it.

 
At July 03, 2007 , Blogger Bernhardt Varenius said...

So, Tony, you do admit that society is justified in "limiting free will" to protect others. So much for your simplistic conservative-bashing!

 
At July 03, 2007 , Blogger Tony Jones said...

Limiting or outlawing assisted suicide protects no one, and actually encourages suicide while the patient can physically do it alone. So if anyone is "pro-death" or "pro-suicide," you are.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home