AB 374 ,a death with dignity bill, will come up this week. (Um, I hope I didn’t miss it, but the status page makes no mention of a vote). So, this isn’t necessarily an easy question for people on either side of the spectrum. A libertarian view would say the government shouldn’t interfere in decisions like this. But it is not inconceivable to see a progressive opposing this.
Frank Russo has an excellent story about the bill:
Berg’s framing, and that of supporters is based on choice and individual autonomy. While there were questions about practicalities of the bill and how it would work in practice, with opponents claiming it would allow for insurance companies and those who stand to benefit, having undue influence, Berg pointed out the layers upon layers of protection written into the bill, and the Oregon experience.
Conservative Republican Assemblyman Anthony Adams saw it as a preservation of life issue and one that he had a duty to impose his belief on others. He stated, “You better darn well believe I want to impose my morality on these people.”
AB 374 gives options, not answers. Morality should be left to a state’s citizens, not its legislators.