Welcome to Breakpoint, a daily look, and an ever-changing culture through the lens of unchanging truth.

For the Colson Center, I'm John Stone Street.

Back in April, a reckless assisted suicide bill looked like it was going to pass and be made British law.

But instead, it was shut down by the House of Lords.

And then in May, the Irish Parliament rejected a law that would have expanded abortion

there by a vote of 85 to 30. But on this side of the Atlantic, things are headed in the opposite

direction. Like all such so-called mercy-killing laws, Canada's medical assistance and dying law

was promised as an option only for those facing imminent death and who would consent.

Things are long past that, likely will go even further.

In fact, recently, a Quebec physician suggested that Canada's already draconian-made program be expanded to include babies.

In response, Brandon Tran of Canada's Campaign Life Coalition said this, quote,

Canadian law currently permits

the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for critically ill newborns, but this medical practitioner's

proposal goes further. He calls for the calculated killing of an infant. These are patients,

babies, who cannot speak, cannot consent, cannot ask for help. If we cannot draw the line here,

I'm not sure where medical professionals imagine the line to be, end quote. A physician-assisted

suicide is always sold to the public as a so-called compassionate measure necessary to spare

those with no reasonable chance of recovery from unbearable pain and suffering during the last days of their lives.

But in every context in which it's been made legal, assisted suicide has never remained limited to rare instances,

certainly not just the rare instances for which it was sold.

And there are reasons this particular slope has always proven so slippery,

anywhere and everywhere it's been

...