#Dying With Dignity Canada

[liminalweirdo]

In today's update of Canada Loves Eugenics, 10,064 people died in 2021 through medically assisted death in Canada, and while MAID supposedly exists to allow people with severe, incurable illnesses to die with dignity on their own terms, MAID is generally used because disabled and mentally ill people cannot access governmental assistance and are living in poverty.

The Canadian government is actively pushing poor, disabled people to death.

oh and by the way, Canada performs more organ transplants from MAID donors than any other country in the world.

"Six disability rights and religious advocates told Reuters that the pace of the planned changes to the assisted death framework in Canada brings additional risks of people opting for MAID because they are unable to access social services - the lack of which could exacerbate their suffering." - source

Anyway, it's basically like this: the USA has the Americans with Disabilities Act and Canada has MAID

[allthecanadianpolitics]

A man who says he suffers from chronic and worsening mental health issues is among those launching a court challenge of the federal government’s assisted dying law, which excludes people suffering solely from a mental disorder. An application filed by Dying with Dignity in Ontario Superior Court on Monday argues that it is discriminatory to bar people with mental disorders from being eligible for an assisted death when it is available to people who suffer physically. The organization is asking the court to immediately quash the mental-health exclusion. Plaintiff John Scully said going to court is his last hope.

Continue Reading

Tagging: @newsfromstolenland

[sweatygardengoatee]

Hunger Devours Our Bodies Amid Arab and International Silence"

"My family lives in hunger.

My family lives in pain.

Not just my family, but my people

Not just my people, but my homeland.

We are all starving, but it’s not just hunger for food.

It’s hunger for dignity, for safety, for the life humanity deserves.

Under a tent thrown in a forgotten corner of the earth, my family isn’t a scene from a movie or a story to pass by.

My family is a reality that sleeps on the dirt, hearing the cold wind as if it were the echo of cries stolen from us.

Our problem isn’t just hunger alone.

Our problem is my mother’s pain as she watches us sleep on the sand, worried that the gas will run out, and she won’t even be able to heat water for us.

Our problem is my little brother, growing up without toys, without a childhood, without hope.

Our problem isn’t just the wars; it’s that the world has decided we’re just numbers.

My family cries out, and the land weeps.

My family calls, while humanity is dying.

We want to raise our voice, not just for my family.

We want to remind you that we are all part of this earth.

And my family isn’t alone.

We are part of a homeland called Palestine, a homeland that must not be forgotten.

If your hearts beat, if your eyes tear up, let your voices rise with ours.

My family, my people, my homeland… We are Palestine

@wescravns @queen-bitchiest @quantumshade @reaperlight @elizabeth-karenina @zvaigzdelasas @zetarays @zerrickorzhov @zyrkon01 @zoeyandguys @xieliancore @xielianss @xflorecitax @xwisegirlx @xhda1449x @critter-of-habit @chilewithcarnage @charliemcavoyjr @cozcat @cassiopcias @brielqrson @butcherhog @blackfashion @breathtakinglandscapes @breathtakinglandscapes @beyonce @norelorn @nocakeno @neige-leblanche @nijuukoo @nijuukoo @macbcth @metaangelz @myprettycoven @mar64ds @madcatnobody @ankle-beez @akajustmerry @aredhels @amygdalae @aincompleta

[pinkkop]

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide:

Spare Me Your Mercy vs. real life

@elimstilnotgarak has got me thinking about Spare Me Your Mercy and specifically euthanasia again so while everyone is talking about how the screenwriter Lux talked about NC scenes in their interview I wanted to talk about something completely different that stood out to me when I read the interview for the first time (other than the NC scene talk), which is this section:

"Euthanasia doesn’t mean you can request an injection to die simply because you’re tired of life. Even in Europe, where euthanasia is legal, there are strict requirements. You must have a certified medical condition specified in the law, endorsed by at least two medical specialists, and the illness must be truly incurable and that you are waiting for death. The purpose of this law is to prevent these individuals from suffering. Instead of suffering for another year, they can die. It's not about being bored with life or lazy to live or not liking yourself when you're old, so you let them inject you with a lethal dose. They don't do that. Many people misunderstand that if you don't want to live, you can go for euthanasia."

The thing is, euthanasia in the form shown and talked about in the show isn't legal in the majority of Europe. Only 5 countries in Europe have legal "Active voluntary euthanasia" which is what Dr. Kan practices and the rest of Europe (except for a couple of micro nations) only have legal "Passive euthanasia" (refusal of treatment / withdrawal of life support)(source: Wikipedia).

I found this particularly interesting because Switzerland is not one of those countries. This made me want to dig further because as long as I can remember media has always been portraying Switzerland as the place where you go if you want to die.

Like in the movie "Me Before You" Sam Claflin's character goes to Switzerland at the end because he doesn't want to live as someone paralyzed from the neck down anymore and even in the BL Every You, Every Me Top's character is going to Switzerland in episode 3, which was the moment I knew episode 4 was going to be really sad because even if they didn't say it explicitly I guessed why he was going to specifically Switzerland.

So why is it that Switzerland seems to have an image of being the place you go if you want to die legally?

It turns out that what IS legal in Switzerland is assisted suicide which has been legal there for over 40 years but even assisted suicide is only legal in 6 countries in Europe in total, if you only count the countries where it's both legal, legislated and regulated (source: Wikipedia).

Switzerland is one of the few places that allow assisted suicide for non-resident foreigners and I'm assuming this is why Switzerland has the mentioned reputation.

If you're curious about the specifics of euthanasia and assisted suicide and how it is enacted in countries like Switzerland I found a really interesting webinar/talk on youtube where a Swiss Palliative Care Doctor talks about her experience with assisted suicide in Switzerland hosted by a Canadian human-rights charity Dying With Dignity Canada in 2022. I found it super insightful and I would highly recommend watching/listening to it because they get into a lot of specifics about how it works in the real world and since the guest is a Swiss doctor and the organization is Canadian you get a broader focus than just what it's like in Switzerland.

One thing I found particularly interesting about the webinar is how Dr. Erika talks about euthanasia (in the form Dr. Kan practices) as if it is not likely to become legal in Switzerland which makes me think that Spare Me Your Mercy and its source book, Euthanasia, should really have been about assisted suicide, but getting into those kinds of details in the book or show would probably not have worked and the book title of Euthanasia is a little cooler than Assisted Suicide 😂

In the small amount of research I've done it also doesn't seem completely clear whether assisted suicide is considered a form of euthanasia but what Dr. Kan does in Spare Me Your Mercy is definitely not helping the patients commit assisted suicide because for that to be the case the patient themselves would need to be administering the lethal dose of medicine.

Hope you found this insightful and I highly recommend doing the dishes while listening to the webinar!

[mylittleredgirl]

i had a strange dream last night that my mother, when she was in hospice, decided to go back to canada to die. we weren't allowed to go with her. she drove away in a white sedan with her dear lifelong friend who used to be a priest, and left me and my father here. we said our last goodbyes here in the driveway, and she wouldn't promise that we could talk on the phone. we just had to wait and go about our lives, mourning someone who was maybe still alive or had maybe already died, wondering if someone would call to tell us what was happening. i think my dad moved out like he did a while after she died in real life, and it was just me here, remodeling the house.

isn't that such a metaphor for loved ones dying? the hope that they will return to the place they came from and have missed, but the sorrow of not being able to join them. the hope we might receive messages, but it's long distance. that we will never know if they are in peace, in a place they once loved, or if it all ended on the way.

this morning my cousin texted me from canada to tell me that my aunt, my mom's sister, has terminal cancer and she didn't know if anyone had told me yet. (they hadn't.)

there's so much love underneath all the distance (and the family complications that came from my mom leaving the church), but i'm so far and have been since i was a little child. farther now, because i am sick and can't drive nine hours each way for a weekend like i wish i could. i'm not sure if a visit would be welcome (because she's suffering and it would be one more thing for my cousin to manage, not because i'm personally unloved). i could visit my other cousins, perhaps, or my aunts and uncles. i am my mother's representative here on earth now.

my dream wasn't necessarily prophetic, although i hope that it might mean If There Are Spirits that my mom's is going north to support her sister. last week, i re-lived the harrowing end of my mom life while i was writing a letter in support of the death with dignity act. yesterday, i re-read a story i wrote about a son watching his mother suffer from dementia. i wrote it in 2007, two years before my mother's first cancer diagnosis. back then, her great fear was that she would ultimately die from alzheimer's like her mother, who wasted away in hospice for more than 10 years. in the face of that, her dying painfully and relatively young from cancer was a relief to both of us. i guess my aunt will also be spared that fate.

i feel most for my cousin who is closest, who has to hold so much of this. i can't know her experience, but i have done the caretaking, have watched my mother suffer, have had to hold the feelings of my father losing his wife. i don't know my cousin well enough to know how to support her without that support itself adding more weight.

i'm not sure what my next step is. i texted my other cousins, and my cousin's wife who i think will be the best one to help me figure out what will be most helpful. in the meantime i'm processing, i guess.

[originalleftist]

PSY-OP ALERT:

Sorry for how long this ended up being, but there's a lot to cover. My sincere gratitude to anyone who actually reads through it.

We have seen again and again how easily supposed progressives, even those considered long-time allies, can quickly fall into believing and acting on fascist psy-ops.

There's no sure way to know that someone is a trustworthy ally. One might say that there is no such thing, since everyone has faults and blind spots and prejudices and is hypocritical to one extent or another.

But here are a few common ways in which so-called Leftists, progressives, feminists, etc get duped into supporting fascist agendas. It's both a litmus test of sorts, red flags that someone may not be as reliable an ally as you think, and also a good shortlist of major narratives the Right uses to try to infiltrate and co-opt progressive communities and divide their opposition, which you should be on the lookout for.

1. Ukraine/Russia. If someone is defending Putin or vilifying Ukraine, they are likely being influenced by Kremlinist-fascist propaganda designed to sway Leftists under the guise of being "anti-imperialism" or "anti-war". This is a larger subset of how opposition to wars and imperialism has been used for decades to draw Left-wingers into supporting conspiracy theorism and hypocritically aligning with dictatorial, even fascist regimes that are seen as opposing "the West".

Note: a specific subset of this, which I've found even people who otherwise don't necessarily fall for it sometimes do, is Assange apologism. Julian Assange is not simply a journalist who was persecuted by the government for exposing its secrets. He is closely-aligned with the Kremlin and its propaganda, and leaked information selectively to hurt Clinton/Democrats help Trump during the 2016 election.

2. Covid. Anti-vax conspiracy theorism used to be a position more associated with the Left, though it has been largely coopted by the fascist Right, thanks to Trump. A lot of this was built on opposition to capitalism/big corporations/"Big Pharma" and probably also environmentalist concerns about toxins in our environment, which appeals to Left-wing sensibilities.

There's also a heavy dose of ableism, particularly fear-mongering about/misrepresenting autism, which is another prejudice that has appeal across the political spectrum. Even if one accepted the (widely-debunked) claims linking vaccines to autism, that means that the central premise of the anti-vax agenda, when you strip it down to its core, can be summarized as "Your child is better off dead of a deadly disease than alive and autistic."

We might also have a word here about support for DNRs*/"assisted dying"/euthanasia and making "assisted dying" more accessible to disabled people, typically framed as letting them "die with dignity" without actually providing them the support that would let them LIVE with dignity (see Canada's MAID controversies). Though I am pleased to see pushback from Left-leaning parties on this recently.

*I should note here that I do not oppose DNRs in principle, nor the right of any patient (assuming they have the ability to do so, and if not that's what living wills are for) to refuse medical care. I DO have a problem when people are mislead or pressured to choose them, or even have them issued without their knowledge/consent (as in the widely-reported case of people with disabilities being given DNR orders in the UK).

3. Trans Rights. Many a proclaimed feminist has shown their true colours once the subject of trans rights came up. Falsely attacking trans people as male predators or fake women does not protect women- trans people are actually one of the most likely groups to be subjected to sexual violence, and if one wants to prey on women, there are far easier and less-stigmatized ways to do so in our society. Transphobia also ultimately serves to oppress cis women, as women who do not perfectly fit white patriarchal standards are investigated and accused of being trans (as seen with anti-drag laws potentially criminalizing non-traditional dress choices, and the attacks on cis female athletes of colour, particularly at the 2024 Olympics).

4. Israel/Palestine. Many so-called Leftists have embraced conspiratorial and even outright genocidal Anti-semitism masquerading as opposing "colonialism" and genocide. This narrative seems to rest on two primary lies- the claim that Jews are not indigenous to the Levant, and therefore colonizers (this is contradicted by overwhelming historical, archaeological, cultural, and genetic evidence), and the usual group-think/collective guilt and "us vs them" mentality (the belief that all Israelis/Jews are collectively guilty for the crimes of the Netanyahu government, and the belief that the rights of Palestinians and Jews cannot coexist, but one must come at the expense of the other).

5. Johnny Depp. Many so-called "feminists" quickly embraced or at least turned a blind eye toward misogynist abuse and conspiracy theories from incels/"Mens' Rights Activists" against a queer activist and DV survivor, out of fandom for Johnny Depp (who also has close ties to both the Kremlin and Saudi governments). Presenting Depp as "the real victim", and Heard as a fake victim undermining "real victims", and as a privileged elite using "white woman tears" to gain sympathy, were other ways in which the Right played on Leftists' sympathies and rhetoric to co-opt them in this case. Amber Heard hate/Johnny Depp fandom is a clear indication that a "progressive" or "feminist" can be swayed to abandon their convictions by celebrity/fandom, and/or lacks understanding of Intersectionality (ie how someone could be relatively privileged in certain ways but still disadvantaged in others, particularly against someone like Depp).

6. Immigration. Many supposed Leftists have proven susceptible to narratives accusing immigrants/foreigners of "stealing" jobs from the working class, while the reality is that immigration also creates jobs (more people means more demand for goods and services), automation is a threat to jobs that has nothing to do with immigration, and immigrants often do jobs most Americans don't want to (which is actually exploitation-in typical DARVO fashion, immigrants are vilified for their own exploitation). Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a divide and conquer tactic used by oligarchs to keep the working class fighting each other, instead of focusing on who's really exploiting them.

7. Housing. Attacks on the Unhoused are one of the most acceptable forms of bigotry in our society on both Left and Right. Often this boils down to simple selfishness- whatever a person's abstract political views, they don't want to see "homeless" or "poor" people around, falsely equate them with criminality/drugs, and are worried about the effect of encampments or even the construction of low-income housing on their property values.

These are all ways in which the Right commonly infiltrates and co-opts Leftwing circles, and pits its opponents against each other (divide and conquer). Of course, there are other issues, other examples. This is not a definitive list. So its important to learn to recognize patterns, so you can spot psy-ops/divide and conquer tactics in other forms/on other issues.

One frequent pattern in these narratives is of course collective guilt/guilt by association: Ukraine is bad because it is aligned with the West, Russia is good because it's against the West. Heard is bad because she's a (relatively) rich famous white woman (somehow Depp isn't, as a rich white man). Israel/Jews are evil because of the crimes of the Israeli government, Hamas is good because they're against Israel. Related to this is the use of DARVO tactics to allow oppressors to falsely claim status as victims, further muddying the waters (and a hard argument to counter, because anyone guilty of it can immediately accuse anyone who points it out of doing the same thing). Assange, an oppressive of the Kremlin, is painted as just a heroic journalist persecuted for exposing the truth. Depp, an extremely wealthy, famous man with a long history of racism, misogyny, violent criminality, and ties to the Mob and dictatorial regimes, is the helpless victim of his ex-wife/a feminist conspiracy. Upper/upper-middle class home owners are the real victims because poor people exist in their communities. White workers are the real victims, not immigrants exploited as cheap labour who don't dare complain if their rights are violated because they might be deported.

A third common trick is to simultaneously paint the target group as a deadly, even existential threat, and as pathetic and weak. This seeming contradiction is a hallmark of fascist propaganda specifically (Umberto Eco listed it on his list of 14 traits of fascism). For example, unhoused people are all lazy pathetic drug users, but also criminals destroying our neighbourhoods. Amber Heard is both a talentless, obviously lying gold digger, but also powerful and competent enough to terrorize her husband (in his home, surrounded by private security on his payroll) for years and mastermind a vast international conspiracy spanning a decade to frame him. Ukraine is not even a real country, but also a huge threat to Russia's security justifying its invasion (propagandists often sidestep this absurdity by simply treating Ukraine as an extension of the US/NATO- this allows them to simultaneously portray Russia's genocidal war as the underdog defending itself against "Western imperialism", and to reinforce their genocidal narrative that Ukraine is not a real nation).

Learn the tricks. Call them out when you see them. And if someone else says you're falling for them, don't get defensive and immediately double-down- listen and consider whether you are, in fact, being misled.

[sparksinthenight]

Letter to the Canadian Government about Mandatory Human Rights and Environment Due Diligence Laws

Our names are ______. We are from ______. We are writing to you to ask that you create good Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence laws for all companies operating in, selling goods or services in, or headquartered in Canada. This will help workers, communities, and ecosystems around the world and contribute to the creation of a fair world where current people and future generations have what they need.

Right now, companies are doing horrific human rights abuses and environmental abuses all around the world.

First of all, workers are being horrifically overworked and incredibly underpaid in intensely dangerous working conditions. Three million workers die every year due to workplace accidents or poisoning. Fifty million people are literally being held in modern slavery. Ten percent of children worldwide are doing child labour. Two thirds of the world are in multidimensional poverty, where they don’t have five or more of their basic needs (such as food and sanitation and education) met. Forget living wages, most workers are not even paid bare subsistence wages. And experts have described working conditions as soul-destroying for workers around the world.

Local communities around factories and plantations and power plants and mines and whatnot are also being polluted. Chemicals from industrial developments leach into the ground, air, and water, poisoning people, destroying crops and plants, and killing local fish and wildlife. This leads to many people dying from being poisoned or losing their livelihoods. People lose their access to clean water and air, to food, and to life.

And the environment is being harmed by industrial activities too. We are at the start of the worst biodiversity crisis the earth has ever faced. Ecosystems all around the world are collapsing, and will continue to collapse. Not to mention, the climate is warming and causing devastation for people the world over. All humans rely on a healthy climate and healthy ecosystems for fertile soil, clean water, safety from extreme weather, pest and disease control, and the list goes on. But it is the actions of industry, companies, and supply chains that are the biggest contributor to the climate and biodiversity crises.

And often, when people stand up for the air and water and land, when they stand up for their communities and/or their fellow workers, they are threatened, intimidated, or even killed.

The companies that are headquartered in Canada or sell their products in Canada are benefitting from and causing all these problems. Their supply chains are rife with human rights abuses and environmental abuses, and they do not take adequate measures to stop the many abuses in their supply chains. Because of this, Canada and all Canadians are guilty of destroying the world and uncountable lives.

But a better world is possible. Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence Laws, or Mandatory Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Laws, or whatever you want to call them, would ensure that any companies that abuse the workers, local communities, and local environments tied to their supply chains are made to pay. Not just made to pay a fine, which companies don’t mind and only view as a cost of doing business, but actually made to face justice and jail time.

These laws are necessary in order to ensure that workers and other people are given the human rights and human dignity they deserve, and they are necessary in order to protect the world’s ecosystems so that future generations can live. Without due diligence laws, the situation will continue to get worse and worse. But with due diligence laws, we can see improvement.

Please enact Mandatory Human Rights Due Diligence Laws.

Thank you,

Send to:

Prime Minister Trudeau- justin.trudeau@parl.gc.ca

Deputy Prime Minister Freeland- chrystia.freeland@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Foreign Affairs Joly- melanie.joly@parl.gc.ca

Find your MP here: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en

Minister of Women and Gender Equality and Youth Ien- marci.ien@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Environment and Climate Change Guilbeault- Steven.Guilbeault@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Wilkinson- jonathan.wilkinson@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Export Promotion, International Trade, and Economic Development Ng- mary.ng@parl.gc.ca

Minister of International Development Hussen- ahmed.hussen@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Innovation, Science, and Industry Champagne- francois-philippe.champagne@parl.gc.ca

Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard Lebouthillier- diane.lebouthillier@parl.gc.ca

[libracorpvs]

The growing genocide against the poor and disabled in Canada via our MAID program killed ~10,000 people in 2021 alone and the UN has warned that it is similar to the early stages of the Holocaust. Funny how that didn’t make it onto that list.

honestly the MAID program is absolutely fucking horrifying. i can't believe we live in a world where a developed nation can have 'kill yourself' as a genuine policy. it's one thing to already be dying and to be given the chance to do so with dignity, but to effectively exterminate the ill is unconscionable. we understand that suicidality is often a response to shitty life circumstances - how can a state, whose responsibility it is to make sure its citizens have a certain quality of life, not only totally shirk that responsibility but advocate for killing people whose lives it can't be bothered to improve?? it sure sounds like a genocide to me. i'm wary of comparisons to the Holocaust specifically though, especially as I can't find a source for that - if you can find it, please send it my way! i managed to find the letter by UN Special Rapporteur Gerard Quinn though

[allthecanadianpolitics]

(Part 2) MAID has been operating since 2021 - it is an offered service, one that was also requested for by disabled advocates. Does there need to be changes to poverty plans? Yes, and that's three different recommendations in the plan that are not mentioned by the right-wing poster. If ur going to assert that consultation plans are akin to genocide, then poverty-affirming plans are the same as a fix to poverty. Neither are true, that's an oversimplification of the issue and dishonest reporting.

Please listen to Disabled Canadians.

[hassibah]

The censure vote passed today in addition to her being expelled from the NDP caucus.

All because of this statement:

Sarah stated the words below today:

Thirteen days ago, I called for an immediate ceasefire and de-escalation by the Israeli government, which had begun a horrific siege on Palestinians in Gaza. Since I made that statement, Israel has only escalated its assault on millions of Gazans.

The Israeli Defence Forces have killed thousands of Palestinians, destroyed residential areas, and ordered the evacuation of at least 20 hospitals in northern Gaza. Israel is telling people who are already injured, sick, and dying in hospitals in Gaza to leave.

Since I made my statement, Israel has bombed refugee camps, UN schools, hospitals,  airports & the Rafah border crossing between Gaza & Egypt. The unspeakable destruction continues, & represents collective punishment against all Gazans in retaliation for attacks by Hamas.

The Ford government has nothing meaningful to say about these atrocities, and has now targeted me to distract from its own scandals. Those of us committed to Palestinian life refuse to be distracted.

I restate my call for an immediate ceasefire by Israeli forces, and for the immediate restoration of food, water, fuel, and electricity to Gaza. I applaud the many elected officials in Canada who have joined this call in recent days, and I hope even more of you will speak out.

I ground my words in the realities of Israeli apartheid, and Israel’s ongoing domination and occupation of Palestinian lands.  Governments and institutions in Canada are trying to use their weight to silence us, to silence workers, students, educators, and peace-loving people who dare to support Palestine. To every person taking risks to speak up for Palestinian dignity and safety, I see you, I hear you, and I am with you.

[iamthepulta]

geology/mining + 3 and 10? 👀

3: Screenshot or description of the worst take you've seen on tumblr

This person commented after I said Canada, the US, and Europe should increase mining to minimize Cobalt extraction in Africa. Definitely the worst take I've seen in a hot minute (maybe this person was confused? lol) I think they were trying to say that recycling is more affordable than mining in the US, but they're just... wrong.

Europe has lots of operating mines, and just googling "cobalt mining Europe" will get you a paper identifying 104 potential deposits. They are in NO WAY mined out. But they're in pretty developed areas, which was why I posted we need to defeat "not in my backyard-ism".

Lithium is currently mined. And you wouldn't mine it in Europe, even in brines, because it's not the right climate.

"Including the labor safety practices make the stuff not exactly affordable". HUMAN SAFETY AND DIGNITY IS NOT DETERMINED BY A DOLLAR SIGN?!

Of course mining isn't environmentally friendly when done by cartels in recovering colonial countries that don't have the resources or governmental power to enforce safety and environmental standards. /stares at the camera.

And recycling gets its own paragraph because ^ sans this post, the most dangerous/misunderstood commentary I usually see online and offline is on recycling. Recycling is metallurgy++. Unlike mineral processing, which deals with limited inorganic chemistry, (usually), recycling sorts through a wide range of organics and inorganics, trying to get back to what the earth provided in an ore deposit. Alloys, like Mo, As, Sb, Bi, Te, don't play nice when you're recycling metals because they're in such small grades in steel. Minerals/rocks, like sand and gravels, hematite, kaolinite, and borates, just... aren't recyclable due to where they end up. Hematite is used in makeup. Kaolinite is used for ceramics and refractories; plus the clay crystal structure is changed once you fire it. Borate is used in cleaning products and cosmetics.

The order of magnitude to mass-separate these sort of things, along with all the plastics and synthesized chemicals in our world now, make recycling expensive and sometimes technologically impossible with current tools. So even though recycling is great and we SHOULD be recycling, the reality of the chemistry has been blown out of proportion. (((I have lots of opinions about how we can create a cyclical sustainable economy but those are not in the scope of this ask game. 😂)))

TLDR: Europe is not mined out. Recycling cannot provide everything we need in our daily lives now. We should mine where it's more expensive to mine because people are dying in other countries and we are not going to stop mining anytime soon.

10. worst part of fanon

No worst part of geology fanon on tumblr!!!! I love everyone here!!! Everyone makes such good memes. The fact someone else independently came up with Edward Cullen dropping acid on limestone and saying "effervescent" is proof of that. ♥

[darkmaga-returns]

Most Americans consider the issue of assisted suicide, if they think about it at all, a foreign curiosity, the subject of a live debate in England or Canada, but a hypothetical in the United States. That’s probably true at the national level: Neither major candidate addressed it on the 2024 campaign trail, and it is hard to imagine President Donald Trump wading into its murky waters during his second term. But right now there are laws permitting assisted suicide—or medical aid in dying, as its proponents call it—on the books in ten states, as well as in Washington, D.C. And there is a growing movement to incorporate the “right to die” in state law across the country. That movement stands to make gains in the coming years.  

Last year, 20 state legislatures considered assisted suicide bills, according to a tally kept by Death with Dignity, one of the leading assisted suicide advocacy groups in the United States. All the proposals pursued legalization more or less along the same lines of Oregon when in 1997 it became the first state to legalize the practice: allowances for mentally competent people with less than six months to live to seek prescriptions from their doctors for life-ending drugs. And all failed. 

Some bills were dead on arrival. In Indiana, for instance, the measure was dismissed almost as soon as it was introduced. “Physician-assisted suicide is contrary to a physician’s duty as a healer and undermines the physician–patient relationship,” said the state senator Tyler Johnson, when introducing an additional resolution condemning the practice more generally. “It is not difficult to stand here today and draw a line in the sand.” The resolution was overwhelmingly backed by the Republican-dominated body. Similar bills died without a fight in states such as Florida, Iowa, and Kentucky.

[tmarshconnors]

Assisted Dying is Murder

This Friday, the House of Commons will debate one of the most contentious issues of our time: assisted dying. The proposed bill seeks to legalize physician-assisted suicide under certain circumstances, purportedly offering terminally ill patients the right to end their lives with medical assistance. Advocates argue it’s about dignity, autonomy, and relieving suffering. But let’s not mince words—this is state-sanctioned murder disguised in a cloak of compassion.

As MPs prepare to vote, they face not just a political choice but a moral reckoning. Legalizing assisted dying is not a slippery slope; it’s a moral cliff edge, and stepping over it would fundamentally change how we value human life.

The Sanctity of Life

At the heart of this debate lies the sanctity of life—a principle that has underpinned our civilization for centuries. Life is sacred not because of its quality but because of its inherent value. Allowing assisted dying shifts the cultural narrative: life becomes conditional, and its worth is measured against suffering, convenience, or perceived "burdens." This is not just a danger to the terminally ill; it risks redefining our collective ethics.

Once we legalize the idea that some lives are not worth living, where do we stop? It won’t take long before subtle pressures arise—financial, emotional, societal—on vulnerable individuals to consider ending their lives to ease the burden on others. That’s not autonomy; it’s coercion wrapped in faux liberty.

The Role of the State

The government’s primary role is to protect life, not to facilitate its destruction. Enacting a law that permits assisted dying would cross an ethical boundary that no legislature should breach. The moment we allow the state to sanction killing, even under tightly controlled conditions, we open the door to future expansions. History teaches us that such boundaries rarely remain static.

Consider the experience of countries like Canada, where medical assistance in dying (MAID) has led to a widening scope of eligibility. Initially intended for terminally ill adults, the law now includes those with chronic illnesses and, in some cases, mental health conditions. This mission creep demonstrates how quickly safeguards erode when human life is reduced to a question of utility.

The False Promise of Safeguards

Proponents of assisted dying assure us that strict safeguards will prevent abuse. But no safeguard is foolproof, especially when it comes to subjective judgments about suffering or consent. How do we ensure someone isn’t being subtly pressured by family members, caregivers, or even their own feelings of guilt about being a burden? Vulnerable people—elderly, disabled, or financially strapped—could easily feel obligated to choose death.

Moreover, once the principle of assisted dying is established, it will inevitably be applied more broadly. After all, if it’s compassionate to help a terminally ill patient die, why not someone with chronic pain? Or severe mental illness? These "logical" extensions lead to a world where the most vulnerable are encouraged, even subtly, to end their lives rather than live with dignity and care.

Real Compassion

True compassion isn’t about helping people die; it’s about helping people live, even in the face of suffering. Palliative care, mental health support, and community resources are where we should focus our efforts. We can alleviate pain and provide emotional and spiritual solace without resorting to lethal injections.

The argument for assisted dying often stems from a place of fear: fear of pain, fear of dependence, fear of loss of autonomy. But instead of addressing those fears with care and support, this bill offers a permanent, irreversible solution to what are often temporary or manageable problems. That’s not compassion; it’s surrender.

A Call to MPs

On Friday, MPs must confront a fundamental question: will we remain a society that values every life, no matter how fragile, or will we take the first step toward normalizing state-assisted death? Assisted dying may seem like an easy answer to a difficult problem, but it is a betrayal of our moral responsibility to the most vulnerable.

Assisted dying isn’t about choice—it’s about abandoning those in need. It’s murder under the guise of mercy. MPs must reject this bill and reaffirm our commitment to life, dignity, and genuine compassion.

[babylove007]

In Canada, you are unworthy of healthcare or justice for sexual interference or DYING WITH DIGNITY, unless you meet the petite highschool/freshman pussyhole qouta

[antinativefaves]

Relevant to the blog because MAiD was specifically targeting Indigenous people in Canada and was proposing offering MAiD to "at risk/homeless Native youths in foster care."

Medical assistance in dying is to give the dying dignity.

It should NEVER be weaponized.

"terminally ill people should be allowed to choose to die if they feel it is the best decision for them" and "euthanasia can easily become eugenics" and "we should provide support for depressed and suicidal people" are statements that can come into conflict but should all be respected