Soylent Green is PEOPLE!

And, the recipients of organ “donations” need to ponder the reality that, today, MOST organ donations come from people that governments want dead.

It used to be a charge hurled against China (that was before the Smart People - those that go along with the Progressive Mantras - decided to replace China as THE WORST COUNTRY EVAH! with Russia). At present, Canada - yes, that ‘gentle, Progressive, caring country’ - is now the world’s leader in harvesting organs from people who the government ‘assisted' in dying before their natural time.

Canada doesn’t take those organs from cancer patients - one of the groups that makes up a goodly percentage of those so ‘helped’. Instead, the Canadian government graciously ‘helps’ people with disabilities, mental illnesses, and suicidal thoughts, among other reasons to want to die, to their Eternal Rest.

Then, they take the organs and sell them to more worthy owners.

Nice racket, eh?

Now, this is not a situation like hospice care, which is for those whose prognosis is 6 months or less left for them to live, before succumbing to their disease. They are often in massive pain at that stage, and, for that reason, are given more narcotics to relieve their suffering than would normally be used with patients.

It’s meant to provide pain relief, while still allowing them to benefit from interactions with others as they near their final days.

The heavy doses of medication often does have the effect of speeding up the timing of their death, as well as reducing their awareness. That’s considered a compassionate use of heavy medication. It is NOT meant for other patients. The earlier death is not the point of increased meds, it is a side effect of the pain relief.

In general, I’m against euthanasia. Too often, those who sign up for it are convinced that their continued presence on this Earth would be an unacceptable burden on their families. They are vulnerable to pressure, either from family members or from medical/nursing staff.

Read what the Disability Rights advocates have to say about the practice.

And, for a blog that focuses on disabilities, from the perspective of a disabled man, look here.

I was reading the stats on wheelchair destruction by airlines on that blog, and was horrified.

It’s not that there are not (allegedly) accessible facilities in most places. However, as William Peace points out, technically accessible may not be, at least for all disabilities. I had an experience, when teaching in a high school (a fairly new one), of needing to have elevator access. I was directed to an elevator 1/2 way around a very large campus, where I would have to move full speed both to it, and back again to my classroom after I exited.

Not possible in the time that I had for class changes. So, I struggled to walk up the stairs, at the cost of great pain to my joints. Without an official medical diagnosis, I had no grounds to use to demand a better accommodation. I retired 4 years later, still getting little assistance with managing movement around the schools I taught.

Since then, I’ve been officially diagnosed with RA (Rheumatoid Arthritis). I still have some issues, particularly when conducting events - ironically, marketing health insurance. Generally, once the problems are pointed out, the venues have been cooperative in correcting them.

As a retired person, the challenges I undertake are self-chosen. Generally good, but those like that encountered by our attendance at the game stick in my memory. I’m cognizant of the law, but seldom have the time to spend getting situations corrected.

What I am going to do is to use it appropriately. There may be a store available in my neighborhood, to use during Medicare season. I plan to use my status as a handicapped person to argue for it, as it causes me difficulty traveling great distances to work my shift. Worth a try.