I am not sure if I was surprised or not when I read the news that the Quebec College of Physicians has endorsed euthanasia in certain “extreme” (sic) cases. The Quebec College is known for its liberal attitude, but I have to say that their desire to legislate mercy killing, even under specific guidelines, is truly something reminiscent of Sodom.

I realize that most people envision Sodom as a place filled with sexual corruption, but without a question one of the most serious atrocities of Sodom was their legislation of laws allowing people to act in a cruel, animalistic manner. They made giving charity illegal, they made taking in guests illegal, they made all forms of assistance and care illegal. They used the legal system to create a society that kept out all people who needed assistance in any way. Be it a place to sleep for a night, a meal or a loan- they were all illegal.

The legal system of a society is a clear sign of the morals and goals of that society. It is one thing to discourage charity, as horrible as that would be, it is quite another to make the giving of charity a criminal offense!

When a society decides it is going to create laws for its citizens, it does so in a way that exhibits the morals and ethics of the society. Be it prostitution, recreational drug use, doing business on holidays or any other set of laws a society creates, good or bad, these laws show the ethics of the people and how they want to live.

In Canada today I believe that mercy killing is practiced. I believe that it happens in hospitals and I believe that many people and authorities turn a blind eye to those who practice it.

Yet, in Canada it is still illegal.

We have laws that represent our belief that human life is sacred. Our laws enforce our belief that the taking of a human life, even if the one doing so has good intentions, even if the victim him or herself wants to die- cannot be taken. The laws represent our beliefs that if someone takes a life, call it mercy killing or not, they are subject to the full enforcement of the law.

For the Quebec College of Physicians to advocate that our society should legislate the ability, even under limited circumstances, for a doctor, a hospital or just a person to be able to legally take the life of another human being is an act of Sodom, an act of murder.

As Jews, as moral people, we have to let them know that this is unacceptable. We cannot allow our society to begin the slippery slide downward to one that does not consider human life to be holy, sacred or above the whims of a hospital or particular doctor.

Even more, the actions of the Quebec College of Physicians are simply the first step to allowing people to decide when life should end, who is worthy to live, who is a “real” person and who is not.

Now they are advocating for the right to allow doctors to actively kill certain patients. If we allow this, we are not only allowing murder to be made legal, but we are also starting the process of redefining who is human, who has a right to live, who should die and when.

It is starting with the ill, the elderly, the terminal. However, will it end there? If they are allowed to legislate mercy killing, how far away are we from legislating the killing of babies with birth defects or people from the wrong country or of the wrong race?

I am going overboard?

Have you ever heard of a scientist named Francis Crick? He is one of the distinguished professors who received the Nobel Prize for his discovery and explanation of DNA. Certainly, together with his partner, Crick is someone who made an enormous difference in the world. Where would we be without his work on DNA?

What you may not know is that later in life he advocated for legislation that a human being is to only be considered a “living human” thirty days after birth. This way, he advocated, if a baby is born with a birth defect or a degenerative disease he could be killed, as long as it is done before he is legally considered to be alive. He advocated that a human life be defined only after the baby is thirty days old.

His idea was brought forth for legislation and thankfully, was rejected.

Yet, how different is his position than the position of the Quebec College of Physicians? They advocate that a human can be killed by euthanasia at the end of their life and Crick advocated that a baby could be killed at the very beginning of its life.

Both opinions, as different as they are, legislate that certain people do not have a right to life.

This time it is mercy killing, what would it be the next time?

Our society cannot allow the legislation of mercy killing. Our allowing this is reasonably the first step towards giving the government, giving people, giving doctors the ability to choose who should live and who should die.

The College has the ability to heal, to help and to do no harm.

They may be well meaning, but this time, doctors- heal thyself.