California ProLife Council

Life. It's Worth the Effort.

  • Home
  • About
    • About CPLC
    • Policy Statements
    • How We’re Structured
    • What is the Right to Life?
    • The Story of the CPLC Bear Flag Symbol
    • Concilio Pro-Vida de California
      • Peticiones
    • Contact Us
    • Login
  • Abortion Sanctuary Legislation
    • AB 2223 Infanticide Legislation
    • Proposition 1 Reproductive Freedom Constitutional Amendment
    • Abortion Bills 2021-2022
  • Volunteer
    • Life Ambassadors
    • Church Outreach
    • Internships
    • Affiliates of CPLC
    • Volunteer Sign-Up
  • Donate
  • 2024 Voter Guide
  • Elections
    • Help your County Find out who is who
    • 2022 Candidate Questionnaires
    • Email to Send with Candidate Questionnaires
    • Past Years Endorsements
      • Elections 2020
      • Voter Guides 2018
      • California ProLife PAC Endorsements 2018
      • Judge Voter Guide 2018
      • 2016 State & Federal Endorsements
      • 2015 Sen Asm Legislator Pro-life Score Summary
      • 2014 General Election Voter Guides
      • CPLC PAC Ballot Endorsements
        • Yes on 46?
      • 2013 Legislative Scorecard
      • Find Your Legislator
      • Register to Vote
  • Projects
    • The Zip Code Project
    • Signs of Life in Hollywood
    • ProLife Youth Competitions
      • ProLife Youth Oratory Contest
      • ProLife Youth Essay Contest
      • ProLife Youth Video Contest
    • Pro Life Attorneys Network (PLAN)
    • The “Forgetting Someone” Project
  • Petitions
    • Against Government Financed Abortion
    • Peticiones
  • Film Festival
  • Resources
    • Abortion Information
    • Public Records Act Request Responses
    • Public Records Act Request Responses
    • ProLife Conference Sponsorships
    • Euthanasia & Assisted Suicide Information
      • Death as a Salesman
    • Pregnancy Help
      • Crisis Pregnancy Centers
    • ProLife Speakers
    • Internship with CPLC
    • ProLife Remote Internship
    • Sanctity of Human Life Sunday
  • News
    • Action Alert
    • Email Archive
  • Blog
  • Life Matters
  • Death as a Salesman
  • 10,000 Californians Praying
  • The Light of Day Project
  • Do More Than Walk!
  • The Evil Twins
  • Help The PAC
You are here: Home / Archives for assisted suicide

California – Execute Murderers or the Medically Vulnerable? It’s the Latter.

August 8, 2016 by Brian Johnston

The California bureaucracy proposed a dramatic policy last week. It was essentially unreported. The Department of Corrections issued new regulations proposing that no prisoner shall be allowed to avail of the so called “Death With Dignity” Act. The law itself, currently under litigation, has been allowed to remain in effect for all other Californians until a ruling expected later next month.  But in the meantime it is proposed that no prisoner, no matter how ill, may avail of the ‘right’ that other ill people have been offered; the supposed ‘right to be dead’. This might indeed be a good idea, but it reveals much deeper problems with the law. Problems other countries have also faced.

Individuals in California are currently ‘free to be dead’ when given a terminal diagnosis and an MD approximates that within 6 months they could die.  If despondent and ‘hopeless’ in their own judgement, the patient is free to simply ‘get things over with.’ And ‘accommodating individuals’ may attend. They may be given a lethal dose of medicine. No psychological evaluation or counseling is required for those patients. As in Oregon and elsewhere, only certain physicians who view mercy killing as benign, are inclined to employ medicine in a deadly manner.

As in Oregon, no investigation is launched into the intentional killing, and as in all ‘assisted suicides’, the ‘assistant’, the third-party agent, is free to go, unquestioned and unhindered, even if he or she is an heir or should they in some other way benefit from the intentional killing.

So why should prisoners be denied this new, ‘human right’? Are prisoners in similar circumstances not human beings and also suffering? If medical killing is indeed both a benefit to the patient and all involved, wouldn’t the authorities be glad to be done with a sickly miscreant? Though they made mistakes, why are these poor captives of fate denied this supposed, ‘basic human right’ to not exist?

Perhaps because it is not a ‘right’ at all.

Brian Johnston is the author, producer of "Death As A Salesman: What's Wrong With Assisted Suicide

Brian Johnston is the author/ producer of “Death As A Salesman: What’s Wrong With Assisted Suicide”

In California we have seen many inversions of what was once governing law, and its principle purpose, protection of the vulnerable innocent. Law is now routinely being used in California not to order society and protect its members, but to alter society; to dramatically change the values of society’s members. Public institutions from the schools on up are seen as tools of social manipulation. Instructive guidance, the basis of all law throughout history is now being employed in an effort to ‘progress’ society toward some new destination, a new cultural-Utopia we have somehow been denied.

Perhaps the experience of Belgium can give us insight into the Brave New World our voluntary euthanasia laws are attempting to impose on both the vulnerable as well as murderous prisoners. There, ‘assisted suicide’ via medicine is authorized even for the non-terminal, provided the patient themselves feel their lives have no purpose. This ‘freedom’ was given new meaning in January 2015 when serial-rapist and murderer Frank van Den Bleeken. He was denied execution at trial, though he desired it, as the death penalty is outlawed in Belgium.

Several years later and diagnosed with incurable illness, van Den Bleeken did not wish to spend the remainder of his life in prison. Initially the courts ruled that he indeed could kill himself at his own hand, since anyone can in Belgium. Grieving family members of his victims were content with the ‘self-execution’ – justice would finally be done. But it was not to be.

The courts in their newfound sense of justice ultimately ruled that what Mr. van Den Bleeken needed is what all  despondent and suicidal individuals should always be offered, psychological intervention and counseling. In Belgium only innocent people may be killed. Murderers must get counseling and protection.

Today capitol criminals cannot be killed in California even if they desire it. The finest counseling and interventions are instead offered. There have been no executions since Clarence Ray Allen in 2006, and complete prohibition is proposed for the November ballot. To be killed in a California prison you will still have to rely on the age-old ‘shiv’ secretly offered by an accommodating murderer.

On the other hand, the most vulnerable and emotionally needy in California are, on a wholesale level, being ‘offered’ medical elimination by society. Nursing homes, hospitals, medical facilities of all kinds can make this available. No counseling is required for those who are depressed and despondent due to their serious illness. No physician need be in attendance.

Thoughts of suicide are the number one indicator of depression. Dispensing poison instead of counseling to those with terminal diagnosis indicates the objective reality that assisted suicide is designed, not for those we care for, but for those we no longer wish to care for.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: blog, Uncategorized Tagged With: assisted suicide, suicide

Media Pushing Death Bill – It Is Moving

March 28, 2015 by Brian Johnston

Because of the high risk of encouraging suicide amongst the vulnerable, international media ethics prescribe careful guidelines for coverage of every suicide. Of  particular import: the instructions not to sensationalize or romaticize the suicidal act, not to offer the ‘justifying reasons’ or publish the suicide note or statements of the individual killed. All of that is now out the window in California.

Billionaire and culture-warrior, George Soros has given millions to ‘Compassion and Choices’ (C&C) to help them influence culture, then pass and implement assisted suicide laws across the nation.th_014

The tragedy of a young California woman, Brittany Maynard, is the principle vehicle used by C&C (formerly known as the Hemlock Society) to carry this message of ‘compassionate’ killing. Simultaneous stories in People Magazine, and in every newspaper in the nation announced her ‘declaration’ to take her own life on November 1st, 2014.

Many individuals have faced illnesses similar to Brittany’s brain cancer, and lived for years.  Amazingly, the day prior to “D Day” Nov 1, Brittany announced that she too would like to put it off a bit longer. Something or someone influenced Brittany to ‘get back on schedule’ and she did indeed die of poisoning on Nov 1.

 While supposedly ‘private’, this was one of the most public ‘self-killings’ of recent times.

It was clear then and even clearer on Weds. March 25th, that many others were directly involved in both Brittany’s care and and the promulgation of her final decision. A Compassion in Choices media team had recorded numerous videos of Brittany, her husband and parents as they  emotionally agitated for a change in California law. These video pleas and personal testimony were repeated for California’s Senate Committee on Health and hundreds of proponents and opponents lined up to state their position.

But the mediagenic nature of Brittany’s lethal decision was clearly front and center.

The California Senate Health Committee, after watching Brittany’s ‘good by’ video and hearing emotional testimony by those who seek to remove the law against third-party involvement in suicide (“assisting suicide”) as well as considerable countervailing documentation of killing of the non-terminal, doctor shopping and manipulated suicide by heirs, voted SB 128 out and on to the Judiciary Committee.

It is expected to be heard in Senate Judiciary in April.

Here is the Senate Health Committee membership with links.

Please let your Senator know of your care or concern for their vote.

Senators Richard Roth, Wolk, Hernandez, Hall, Mitchell and Monning  supported suicide

Senators Nielsen and Nguyen opposed.

Senator Pan abstained.

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: blog Tagged With: assisted suicide, california prolife, californialegislation, death with dignity, end of life, euthanasia, mercy killing

Assisted suicide being voted on in Sacramento!

March 14, 2015 by Brian Johnston

Assisted suicide being voted on in Sacramento!
 
The medically dependent who are depressed will be at immediate risk of their lives! In Oregon and in other jurisdictions it has proven impossible to restrict this practice to ‘just certain’ ill patients. The medically dependent such as Alzheimer’s patients; the depressed disabled; and other non-terminal have all been killed under ‘assisted suicide’ regimes.
 
You can find some “dangers of assisted suicide” talking points here:
Talking points
 
Please communicate with YOUR state legislator. Find him or her here: California Legislators
 
In addition to your personal legislator, be sure to communicate with the Senate Health Committee and if possible attend the SB 128 hearing
  • Wednesday, March 25 at 1:30pm room 4203 at the State Capitol
  • Seating /space is first come, first served so get there early
  • Wear red
SB 128 opposition letters should be emailed, traditional mail and/or faxed to both Senate Health & Judiciary Staff:
Senate Health Committee – www.shea.senate.ca.gov
Attention: Teri Boughton
State Capitol, Room 2191
Sacramento, CA  95814
Phone:  (916) 651-4111
Fax:  (916) 266-9438
Email: Teri.Boughton@Sen.CA.Gov
(Send a copy to the Committee’s Republican Policy Analyst Joe Parra atJoe.Parra@Sen.CA.Gov)
 
 

 

Filed Under: blog Tagged With: assisted suicide, california prolife, californialegislation, euthansia, prolife

Donate to CPLC!

Donate Cryptocurrency

Pre-order the new book by Brian Johnston.

MyPillow

Recent Posts

  • (Ira Byock, MD, advocate of terminal sedation, advances his cause under the aegis of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles on Feb 7.)
  • Abortion regulations in California? None. Though unregulated, it’s government funded
  • The Bloomberg Effect
  • What does your Church actually teach about Voting?
  • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints Responsibility to vote and vote for morally upright values

Sign Up for more Pro Life News

Sign up for personalized pro-life updates in your area!

There was an error fetching lists. Please refresh your lists and try again.
Privacy by SafeUnsubscribe

California ProLife Council
500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350
PO Box 935
Sacramento, CA 95812

Toll-Free: 1.800.924.2490

Donate Your Car

Donate your Car

Donate to CPLC!

Donate Cryptocurrency

MyPillow

Copyright © 2025 · Outreach Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in