Assisted Suicide

On Friday 11th September 2015, the House of Commons will debate Rob Marris’ Assisted Dying Bill which came first in the Private Members’ Ballot and his Bill is the fifth attempt to establish in law a right to die, given various safeguards.

If passed the Bill would allow “competent adults who are terminally ill to choose to be provided with medically supervised assistance to end their own life”.

They must have a clear and settled intention to do this, have made a declaration to that effect on a prescribed form, in the presence of an independent witness, be over 18 and resident in England or Wales for not less than one year.

A registered medical professional must certify that the individual is terminally ill and expected to die within six months.

Two doctors must counter-sign the form, the one who will assist the dying and another independent doctor and the doctor who will assist the act must ensure that the individual is aware of palliative medicine, hospices and other care available.

They will prescribe the medicine to be used but it must be self-administered by the person choosing to die and the attending doctor must remain with the person until death has occurred, the Bill includes provisions for conscientious objection by medical personnel.

Any act contrary to these provisions could lead to five years in prison on conviction.

The British Medical Association (BMA) and many doctors oppose the Bill but the campaigning organisation Dignity in Dying claim that 82% of the general public support the idea.

Supporters like George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury along with some Christian argue that it would spare terminally ill people the pain and distress they are experiencing, they say that people should have this right to die because we are autonomous beings.

Their choice would also spare their loved ones from witnessing their suffering and save them the costs of caring for someone who is expecting to die within six months anyway.

Opponents contend that palliative care reduces the likelihood of unbearable pain and dispute the assumptions of autonomy.

Many Christians see life as a gift of God and suicide as rebellion against Him.

They also question how certain a doctor can be that a patient is likely to die within six months and have doubts about the safeguards for medics who conscientiously object to assisting someone to take their life, they are aware of the pressures on doctors who refuse to do abortions.

Public attitudes on prematurely ending life are muddled.

Capital punishment was abolished and the decision to invade Iraq strongly opposed but there are 200,000 abortions a year in the UK.

They may claim that assisting someone to take their own life is compassionate but do very little to care for the victims of violence in Syria and Iraq today.

If this Bill is passed it will be further evidence of this country’s flight from faith in an relationship with our Creator.

If you want the Bill to fail you can ask your MP to be in the House of Commons on Friday 11th September and to vote against it by visiting the 'No to Assisted Suicide' website

The Labour Party principle or power?

The Labour Party leadership contest has thrown up some challenging questions. 

Jeremy Corbyn’s candidacy has attracted thousands of new members who seem likely to give him victory on Saturday 12th September 2015.

The first question is how he will hold the party together? As at least eight Shadow Ministers have said they will not serve in his front bench team.

One estimate is that no more than thirty of the 232 Labour MPs support him and there has been talk of a “Resistance” movement.

Former leaders Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have urged the party not to vote for him, as have David Blunkett and David Miliband.

John Major was so frustrated by his Europhobic right wing that he resigned and sought re-election to restore his authority as leader but Corbyn would face a much larger group of disaffected backbenchers and he was a serial rebel himself, voting 238 times against the party Whip in the last Parliament.

He is unashamedly a socialist, he favours higher income tax for the wealthy and increasing Corporation tax.

He has flirted with restoring Clause Four in the party’s constitution and the renationalisation of the railways and other public services.

He also advocates leaving NATO, scrapping our nuclear arsenal and moving closer to Russia, as well as expressing his admiration for Putin’s foreign policy and opposes a fair trade agreement with the USA.

He is coy about our EU membership but wants to see the social chapter strengthened, especially in relation to employment rights.

Corbyn’s socialism is traditionally what Labour stood for so why do so many MPs not support him.

The voters rejected socialism in 1979 and the party was out of office for eighteen years until Blair led it to the political centre ground.

Corbyn’s opponents fear that a lurch to the left will make the party unelectable again for another decade, so what matters most to the party: principle or potential power?

That prompts two other questions. First, are the voters still hostile to socialism?

Social media comment complains that the parties are too similar and leave little room for choice.

George Osborne’s adoption of the Labour policy of a compulsory living wage was an example of this and equally his aim to make a budget surplus normal and capping benefit at £23.000 per household has some support on the Labour benches.

So is some measure of continuity in government policy desirable or are voters comfortable with the possibility of major changes after elections.

The second question is whether those who consider principle more important than electability are comfortable with the possibility of repeated electoral defeats and a continuing Conservative government?

A large majority of Labour MPs are not. Is the popular preference for principle really evidence of naiveté?

The voters will decide that in 2020, but in the meantime will a divided Opposition effectively hold the government to account?

Our democratic system needs a strong Opposition as well as a sustainable government.

From that perspective, the Labour Party needs our prayers for wisdom regardless of our own political sympathies.

Why the proposed changes to Sunday trading laws are wrong

The government proposes to legislate to allow local authorities to relax restrictions on Sunday trading in their areas.

The current law permits small shops – with less than 3000 sq ft floor space – to open any hours but larger shops are restricted to six hours.

The proposal announced by the Chancellor in his Summer Budget 2015 is said to be worth £1.4 billion a year and breathe new life into high street trading.

Churches have always campaigned to keep Sunday as a special day, for rest, recreation and religious observance but Christians are now a small minority in secular Britain and told we should not impose our values on the majority.

It is not that simple and there are non-Christian reasons for the current restrictions.

Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW), strongly opposes the extension of Sunday shopping and their members want time at home with their families.

Family breakdown is a serious issue in Britain today, costing taxpayers £43 billion a year supporting broken families and harming many children in those families.

The current law had a business rationale by limiting the opening hours of the big supermarkets gives the small shops a modest competitive advantage on Sundays.

The proposed changes could see more of them closing and if Sunday trading develops as the Government hopes it will also increase urban traffic as supermarkets will need additional deliveries.

There are also potential health issues as everyone needs a work/life balance that includes rest.

The pressures of seven day working will fall heaviest on managers who are not part-time but if Sunday is just like any other day time for community activities as well as family will be lost.

Nor should it be thought that only Christians oppose more Sunday working, secularism challenges all faith communities.

The Hindu Forum for Britain has said they would welcome one day a week set aside for spiritual reflection also Jews and Muslims will have similar concerns for their special days. 

Respect for religious liberty is indivisible, however much beliefs differ.

Atheists don’t have to be inconvenienced by treating Sunday as a special day as there are six other days on which to shop and they need time for rest, recreation and family life too.

Ultimately the proposal is another step in privatising religion out of the public sphere.

This runs counter to Article 9 of the European Convention and Article 18 of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Act which safeguards the right to practice religion in public and in community with others.

If Christians are discriminated against by limiting their freedom to worship on Sunday in order to privilege the minority that actively want to shop and trade on Sundays, the Government will be putting the clock back so far as non-discrimination is concerned.

The proposal to devolve the decision to local authorities sends a wake-up call to people of faith in each community to persuade their councils to Keep Sunday Special.

It will call for gracious campaigning not ignorant ranting and it calls for much prayer so that the fruit of the Spirit inspires the campaigning. 

Paul’s advice in 2 Corinthians 10:5 is very relevant.