Normalizing suicide is nothing to celebrate

The news of multiple deaths and injuries to the youth hockey team in Canada is gut wrenching. These young people and the accompanying adults were on their way to a game this past Friday, probably just enjoying the moment, when the unthinkable happened, snuffing out lives way too early, without any indication of imminent tragedy. My heart breaks for all those in unimaginable grief right now, especially given the shocking nature of the tragedy. 

But the devastating event that happened to the hockey team has me thinking of another tragedy that recently unfolded in Canada. It, too, involves death, but, in this case, takes on a wholly different tone of tragedy because the two people who died purposely set out to end their lives under Canada’s permissive euthanasia law.

In a recent interview with The Globe and Mail, George and Shirley Brickenden reminisced about their first date – a "fairy-tale evening that led Mr. Brickenden to propose marriage six days later". The Brickendens knew that six days after this interview they would be dead. On March 27, George and Shirley died holding hands in their own bed in a Toronto retirement home. Their children watched from the foot of the bed as their parents drew their last breaths at almost the same moment. The couple died by lethal injection administered by a “physician”.

Suicide is terrible in itself. But to aid someone in procuring their own death is profoundly wrong, and yet another sad reminder of the culture of death in which we live. One might use the argument that the couple was in great pain and bedridden, which still wouldn’t justify suicide, but, "two nights before their death,” the Globe and Mail reports, the Brickendens “went out for one last date at Opus, their favourite restaurant in Toronto's Yorkville neighbourhood. The next night, they bid farewell to more than 20 members of their immediate family at a bon voyage dinner at their daughter Pamela's apartment."

I’ve been to my share of farewell parties. They're usually bittersweet, and can even be painful, especially at the end of the party when it’s time to say goodbye to the guest of honor, who is usually simply just going to another job or moving out of town. It's hard to fathom the type of mindset George and Shirley’s loved ones must have been in when that party came to an end. 

For the media to romanticize and applaud the couple's decision to end their own lives indicates how eroded the sacredness of life has become. We're no longer supposed to celebrate things like large families or patriotism or simple acts of chivalry, but are expected to embrace murder-suicide as something good because it allows us to shirk any amount of suffering - something we're supposed to reject at all costs. It's the quality of life that has become sacred - not life itself.  

And how far have we fallen that the children would not try to talk their parents out of this decision? Well, maybe they did try to no avail, but to then have a party? Talk about throwing in the towel. Even the Dean of Toronto's St. James Cathedral admitted he had "without hesitation" supported the Brickenden’s wish for their funeral to be held at the Anglican church. When a supposed house of God normalizes and embraces the throwing away of life that God creates, we had better take notice and we had better take a stand. 

A similar case took place last year in Oregon when Charlie and Francie Emerick held hands as they died together in their bed after taking lethal doses of medication obtained under the state’s Death with Dignity law (actually over 1,300 similar cases have taken place since Oregon’s law passed). And as happened with the Brickendens, the Emerick’s children treated their parents’ self-imposed death as something noble. Their daughter, Sher Safran, even documented and filmed her parents’ conversations and preparations right up to their deaths. 

As Time reports, “It was supposed to be a remembrance only for the family, but they ultimately decided to have the clips edited into a film that could be shared outside of the immediate family." The result is "Living & Dying: A Love Story," a documentary that details the background of the Emericks’ final decision and their resolve in carrying it out. In other words, a documentary that attempts to put a sparkling spin on darkness.

“I thought it was brave and beautiful,” said Carol Knowles, a member of Francie Emerick’s book club, of the documentary. “You could see the care with which Charlie and Francie had made that decision.” If only Carol could have seen the tragedy unfolding before her very eyes. Maybe she would have been the voice the Emericks needed to hear.

“They had no regrets, no unfinished business,” the Emericks' daughter added. “It felt like their time, and it meant so much to know they were together.”

While the devil works feverishly to convince the world that death is something romantic at best, no big deal at worst, I wonder if, like with post-abortion syndrome, eventually members of these families are going to have significant emotional problems associated with the type of complicated grief that comes with major guilt. Unless they are sociopaths (which I doubt), they will only be able to stay in denial of the wrongfulness of these actions and their complicity in it for so long. At least, not to wish regret on them, I hope they come to that realization of wrongfulness, because that would signify hope that this darkness can eventually be overcome by the light of truth – the truth that life is sacred, and that even the suffering that often accompanies life is something to be valued.

The whole thing is abhorrent, but more than anything, it's just sad. No doubt abortion doctors would disagree. They probably see this rejection of the life that God created for us as an opportunity to expand their business. Now they can get them coming and going. In the meantime, as long as certain clergy, health professionals, and family members would have everyone believe that ending life is a good thing – and unless more of us stand up loudly for God’s truth - things will only get worse. At the very least, celebrating self-imposed death comes off looking like a slap in the face to those who are experiencing grief against their will. 

What do you think? Share your thoughts by clicking on the comments link in the bar below. No registration necessary. Or, email me at JMS.TheRightTrack@gmail.com . 

Leftist censorship and misogyny alive and well...

Next week, Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg will appear before two congressional committees to discuss revelations that Facebook has lost control of the data of millions (or even billions) of users. But there's another scandal going on at Facebook: Conservative speech is being systematically targeted and censored.

It's been happening over many months. Earlier this year, Facebook announced a major change to its algorithm that took conservative posts out of your news feed. Zuckerberg said the change was made to promote "news that is trustworthy, informative, and local."

For many years now, conservative sites have been noting the negative impact of Facebook's algorithm changes, as their pages and posts "coincidentally" reach a smaller and smaller audience. Facebook also allows less and less traffic to move from Facebook to conservative homepages.

Recent evidence of this is revealed by what Facebook did to Breitbart, one of the largest conservative sites in the nation. Facebook is now tagging every post that links to a Breitbart story with an "about this article" info bubble that calls Breitbart a "far-right" website, and then says: "The site has published a number of falsehoods and conspiracy theories, as well as intentionally misleading stories. Its journalists are ideologically driven, and some of its content has been called misogynistic, xenophobic, and racist..."

As an aside, it makes me laugh that Breitbart is called misogynistic by Facebook while it completely ignored Hillary Clinton's recent comments in India where she actually said American women who voted for Trump did so because their husbands and male bosses coerced them into doing so. If that isn't hating on women, I don't know what is. But I guess a "champion" of women like Hillary is allowed such appalling speech as long as she touts the far left agenda every chance she gets.

As for Facebook and the other rulers of Silicon Valley, Congress may need to act to draw lines around what is or is not permissible, including how much of our own data is accessed by and sold to vendors for their own uses. But each of us needs to take a look at what we put out on social media; what we think it means to others; what we think is meant by social media connections with others; how we weigh it, and how much we can be manipulated by it. Above all, we need to be responsible for knowing what we can and should do to limit access to our own data if we don't want this sort of thing happening in the first place.