Its not often that I agree with Bandt's politics, but on this issue
I certainly do and it deserves support. He is also correct, it
won't be raised by the liberals or labour, who are too busy with
voting strategics to worry about the matter.

An inquiry would make perfect sense, as there is indeed much
misinformation around about various overseas systems which have
been implemented. We know that some systems work very well, others
less so. Establishing what would be best for Australia to finally
address this issue, is overdue.

As to the author, his Diocesan Centre for Family Life is a
Catholic lobby group as far as I can establish, so they would
continue to promote Catholic dogma and would no doubt be against
it. But then they would be against condoms too, no doubt.

But we also need laws to suit non Catholics.

Good on you Adam, for for it!

I too would like to voice my support for an inquiry into "end of life decision making".
What is voluntary euthanasia, and what is assisted suicide, and what are the differences between the two?
Is there a third?
What works, where and why?
And what makes the highly charged phrase "state-sanctioned-killing" a better choice than the relatively neutral "end-of-life decision-making"?

Yabby has proved that he can use a search engine. Good for you!

Yes, at one time I worked for the Catholic Church in Adelaide. That was some years ago. I am no longer in their employ and HOPE is a private donor funded organisation with no formal links to any other organisation or church.

Yabby, I get why you would want to use an alias for your posting; but using a name that means a creature with no spine? Come on?

http://www.adelaide.catholic.org.au/sites/SouthernCross/features?more=1557

Indeed Paul, the old organisation promoted Catholic dogma and
so does the new one. No doubt about it, the Catholics are great
lobbyists and use all sorts of names to promote their agenda.
Perhaps its best that we all know it and call a spade a spade,
when we see a spade.

Now some of us believe that Catholic dogma should be for Catholics.
You have freedom of religion, we want freedom from religion.

Yabby, that article was from at least four years ago.

Find me a comment on my website that relates in any way shape or form to what a reasonable person might understand to be a 'Catholic thought'. You can't. Why? Because it's not Catholic.

It might suit your position on this issue to think so, but it ain't so.
I respect my audience and those I argue with by trying to argue reason and common sense. How about you give that a try instead of 'Catholic baiting'?

Paul, I am quite prepared to debate the issue in any which way that
you want. But lets establish some facts, judging by what you
have written elsewhere. You seemingly accept the Catholic dogma as
your own religious belief and are now paid to lobby against the
introduction of voluntary euthanasia in Australia. So no matter
what points I make, you are hardly going to accept any of them
as valid.

Lets also accept that the Catholic Church is a hugely wealthy
organisation, AFAIK the world's largest owner of real estate just
for one. Euthanasia is one of those points they have vowed to
lobby against in any which way that they can. The church would also
stand to lose revenue from their palliative care investments.

How much that they contribute in indirect ways to your organisation,
I simply don't know, but nothing surprises me anymore, when it comes
to Catholic lobbying tactics. They would hardly admit this openly,
or people like me just sit there and point out that its all just
religious dogma.

If it were up to me, all charitable institutions which benefit from
paying no taxes, should be forced to openly disclose their financial
affairs. Sadly that is not the case.