Word engineering has always been intrinsic to the euthanasia movement. Always. Indeed, today mercy killing and euthanasia are synonyms thanks to the euthanasia movement of the late 19th Century. Before that, the term “good death” meant dying peacefully (and naturally) in a state of grace.
These days the word engineering by assisted suicide proponents seeks to make it so that terminally ill people can’t really commit suicide, at least if the death is caused by an overdose—and besides, the term is soooo judgmental that people might reject the agenda. So, they have spent much effort courting the media to have the term changed in news stories to the gooey euphemism, “aid in dying.”
But apparently the Associated Press didn’t bite. From a media blog in The Olympian:
The debate, I’m told, went to the top of the Associated Press’ command center back in New York, and the ruling was “assisted suicide.” That means member papers, including The Olympian, are likely to follow the line. Aside from the logic of the argument (it is some one asking for assistance in ending their own life) there’s the practical matter of time. Any paper with its own term would have to scan AP stories from across the state and edit out the “assisted suicide” name before running them.I admit to being pleasantly surprised. That won’t change the bias in the coverage—sick woman wants to choose time and manner of death, compassionate doctor and loving family supportive, but mean anti-assisted suicide proponents say no (quote after jump), followed by rebuttal from courageous advocate of change. (If I have seen that story once, I have seen it 1000 times!) But at least when the biased stories are written, the proper, descriptive terminology will be used.
