Academics Seek to Pathologize the Elderly, Make "Old Age" a Disease

[HomeschoolDad]

demographic changes that will increase the number of “progressive” voters, and the world growing even further away from God than it already is

I have quite a few “progressive” beliefs as well, including, but not limited to, taxpayer-funded universal health care, free or low-cost higher education for all who desire it, and even some kind of reparations scheme for those who can prove that they have residual damage from past systemic discrimination (or even that their ancestors were enslaved and not paid for their labor). To tell the truth, I really do not like voting for Republican candidates over Democratic ones, but I am forced to, because of the abortion issue. If all parties and politicians were equally pro-life, my questions then would be whether the policies of Democrats, and liberals in general, conform to Catholic social teachings on subsidiarity. It would be so gratifying, to be able to confine one’s political decisions to things such as this, where people of good will can legitimately disagree on whether problems should be solved at a higher or lower level — and not on issues of life and death, good and evil. But that’s not where we are, sad to say.

However… when (and if) “the powers that be” decide that we’ve reached the point where euthanasia has to be slipped in “through the back door” — or even that there is a finite amount of health care to be allocated, and that the elderly need to be “triaged out” because they’ve lived their life and it’s too expensive to provide anything beyond palliative care — who is more likely to accept this as “the way things are nowadays”, and to succumb to propaganda that bills this as kind, compassionate, loving, sensible, decent, and whatever other anodyne adjectives you could attach to it? Those who have already accepted the murder of the unborn? Those who have already shaken off other aspects of traditional Judeo-Christian morality because “we live in modern times now”? And of the two parties we have now, which one is more likely to get behind it, and which one is more likely to oppose it? I think the question answers itself.

 

[Shakuhachi]

… said their inclusion would encourage doctors to diagnose and prescribe treatments including drugs, diet and exercise that could prevent age-related conditions developing into critical illnesses…"

I am clueless why the diagnosis would be neeed for common sense care.

 

[blackforest]

Thank you - and I do mean thank you - for clarifying. I’m not sure that “progressive” would be the right label for advocating for euthanasia, so your ironic quotes are appreciated.

To tell the truth, I really do not like voting for Republican candidates over Democratic ones, but I am forced to, because of the abortion issue.

After learning that pro-choicers are smuggling RU-486 to women in Alabama and then coaching them how to use it over the phone, I’ve come to the realization that “strategic voting” over Roe v. Wade may no longer be a sound strategy. We’ve been voting as we vote and talking as we talk for over 50 years, and even if Roe v. Wade is overturned, we’ll just end up with a state-by-state legal battle. My new goal is to make abortion unthinkable.

Mike Huckabee wisely noted that how our nation treats the unborn has wider ramifications for society, including how we treat our elderly, so fortunately my tangent comes back to this thread!

I definitely agree with you in that I get on edge any time I see the slightest hint of treating our elderly - or disabled - in any utilitarian way.