I sometimes wonder whether those who claim to want to protect our freemdoms are only happiest when they seem to be being taken away. That is the only reason I can come up with for the way in which recent legislation has come in for so much attack.

As with most of the commentary on the Anti-Terrorism legislation, the article is a (wilful?) misrepresentation of what this suicide legislation says. Take one of Greg's examples:

"One final example will suffice to illustrate the unfairness of this new law. A person might return from a trip to Oregon in the US or the Netherlands, two jurisdictions where strictly regulated assisted suicide is permitted. If an individual uses the Internet phone, fax or to discuss practices in Oregon or the Netherlands with a fellow activist, friend, doctor, or loved one, then that individual will be made a criminal by this new law."

In this context, the "material" that the legislation talks about is the discussion itself. Substitute the word "telephone discussion" for the word "material" in the legislation, and it becomes obvious that Greg's proposition does not stand up, because the required elements of the offences do not exist. That's even before the clarifying exceptions in subsections 474.29A (3) and (4) come into play.

Sylvia.

After his recent article "australia is a racist backwater" had so much rubbish in it, i'm not gonna bother reading his new one!

If i chose to live, it would be appauling if society killed me.

So if i chose to die, would not it be equally appauling that society keeps me alive?

i support suicide on humane grounds only, and as a last resort.

There is nothing wrong with these laws. This prevalence of information should not be made available to the vulnerable or those in an induced state. The anonymity of the net means these type of forums etc are being used by the wrong people, and the government acknowledges this problem.

I dont want to see teenagers, depressed people and the like with easy how to die info. We are taking a backward step in society if we view the killing of oneself as nothing short of self murder. When i was younger i have been depressed, but the person i was then is not who i am now. The least we can do as a concious government is to stop the prevalence of potentially life threatening information. those who have the correct grounds to do so will recieve the information one way or another.

I prefer to have it illegal to assist so as to allow the means to be part of the mental soundness test. Really, if you can't work out a way to do yourself in you aren't mentally qualified to know what's good for you.

Laws like this are rather pointless realy sucking up to the RR in the mob. The information will be freely available on the net no matter what laws are passed in Oz. After all US web servers host pro OBJ site even though the US is spending billions fighting him.

Thanks, Greg. I'm a fit, non-depressed mid-sixty year old who decided, a year ago, it would be sensible to find out now what I could do if I ever find myself, as I may do, in a situation where I would prefer to end my life rather than continue (eg if I was suffering from early Alzheimers, or facing a painful and inevitable death from kidney cancer etc.)

It was through the 'EXIT International' website that I found the advice I needed and I'm grateful to its founder, Dr Philip Nitchke for all he is doing to help suffering people. His moral courage amazes me. To be willing for so long to put up with misrepresentation, hurtful accusations of 'encouraging suicide' and the cruel nickname 'Dr. Death', all because he believes, as I do, that there are situations in which choosing to end ones life is a moral and rational choice and that it is morally right to give people in those situations, if they want it, whatever information is available on how to end their lives without pain.

One of the main aims of this legislation is to stop Philip Nitchke and 'Exit International' continue its work of helping people who seek its help. And they are not young, vulnerable people. The fifty I met at a recent 'Exit' meeting were sensible adults, all over 60 and all in control of their lives. That's why we want information. We don't want to wait until we're in a helpless position and unable to do anything but let doctors make all the decisions.

Like you, I'm saddened that our government has gone so far down the path of constricting freedom of speech and that, judging from the other comments, some Australians are happy to see them do it. Isn't it interesting that a right wing government quick to accuse the other side of favouring a 'nanny state' is attempting to prevent me accessing information 'for my own good'!