Nancy Elliott wasted no time sending a message to the New Hampshire Senate committee considering SB 490, the “end of life” study bill. The bill’s sponsor made her assisted suicide advocacy clear in her own testimony, if not in her bill. Elliott, a former New Hampshire legislator who is now heads up Euthanasia Prevention Coalition – USA, responded with written testimony. It was published in full on EPC’s blog. Here’s an excerpt.
I am opposed to SB490 because it is a thinly veiled effort to study Assisted Suicide, also known as death with dignity, medical aid in dying, euthanasia and mercy killing, with the intent to legalize it in New Hampshire. Our state has a long standing bipartisan opposition to Assisted Suicide. This practice is discriminatory to the disabled and elderly, sending them the message that they are not as valuable as able bodied people. While young and healthy individuals receive suicide counseling, the elderly, sick and disabled are steered to take their lives.
I know this bill is for a STUDY, but studying things that would be harmful if passed is a waste of taxpayer money and runs the risk of giving legitimacy and momentum to this practice….I believe that this commission is dangerous to our citizens because the report that will come out, will indicate an imaginary mandate for Assisted Suicide.
When an end-of-life study committee bill (SB 426) was proposed in the New Hampshire Senate earlier this year, I asked former New Hampshire state rep and current Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA leader Nancy Elliott about the legislation. What’s wrong with a “study”?
Elliott noted that the bill as introduced “talks about end of life choices, but singles out ‘Aid in Dying’ – a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia. It is apparent that the ‘choice’ that this bill wants to promote is suicide. By rolling this into a commission stacked with pro-euthanasia people, this idea can be foisted on the citizens of New Hampshire. It gives a platform for pro-assisted suicide/euthanasia advocates to have a platform to push this with.”
Last March, I compiled voting records for eleven life-issue bills considered by the New Hampshire House this year, offered a few observations, and gave a thumbs-up to the reps who were consistently pro-life.
Abby Johnson and the team at And Then There Were None have helped more than 300 abortion workers who have chosen to leave the abortion industry and seek other employment. Johnson and her co-author Kristin Detrow share the stories of some of those workers in The Walls Are Talking.
“Abby Johnson gives fair warning in the preface to her new book: ‘This will not be an enjoyable read. It is a necessary one, however…’ She’s right on both counts. The Walls Are Talking gives former abortion workers a voice, and what they have to say is unsettling. ‘Settled’ is not how Johnson wants to leave anyone.”
By the modest standards of this New Hampshire-based blog, the popularity of this post was truly remarkable. It was published in February and continued to draw readers throughout the national presidential primary season.
“A day before the New Hampshire primary, two major Democratic candidates are campaigning hard against each other. On one point, they’re united: absolute support for unregulated abortion. [Henry] Hewes does not buy it, and he’s willing to bring a pro-life message not only to voters in New Hampshire but to other states holding primaries. ‘The primary goal of my campaign is to raise a bunch of money to do pro-life education. My family is not preparing for a move to Washington, D.C. [I want to] raise money to run pro-life ads that are not really designed or focused around getting people to vote for Henry Hewes, but around pro-life education, educating people to what’s going on and focusing their attention on the prolife issue.'”
Earlier this year when SB 426 was introduced in the new Hampshire Senate, I asked Nancy Elliott about the bill. Nancy is a team member with the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and is a former New Hampshire state representative.
“The bill talks about end of life choices, but singles out ‘aid-in-dying’“
Q: What’s wrong with simply studying end-of-life issues? How is that related to assisted suicide legislation?
Elliott: We have studied this topic extensively in New Hampshire. This bill [in its original form, without the proposed House amendment] talks about end of life choices, but singles out “Aid in Dying” – a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia. It is apparent that the “choice” that this bill wants to promote is suicide. By rolling this into a commission stacked with pro-euthanasia people, this idea can be foisted on the citizens of New Hampshire. It gives a platform for pro-assisted suicide/euthanasia advocates to have a platform to push this with.Continue reading “A veteran NH prolifer on end-of-life-study bill: “just a Trojan horse””