Dear Jonas:

Sorry for the delay in responding.

Well, Jonas, your thinking is deeply flawed and contradictory.

To begin with Free Will is a gift that God has given us that is suppose to give us the freedom to choose and love Him. But, this gift also allows a person the capacity to choose against God, to reject Him, and to sin.

Thus, this capacity gives us the ability, not the right, to choose whatever he likes to do with himself regardless of whether or not it harms others. A person can choose to murder, rape, steal, torture, slander, etc. all of which harms others.

You state a person can "choose whatever he likes to do with himself as long as it doesn't affect the rights of his neighbour; notwithstanding the fact that the particular action is moral or immoral." If something is immoral it automatically harms others. Anything that harms others affects and effects the rights of his neighbor.

So, before we get out of the first paragraph we have fatal flaws in your thinking.

You end the paragraph with, "Individuals should take greater responsibility for the actions and decisions that they make." This is true, but free will gives the person the ability to choose otherwise. To posit this true statement is to apply morality, which is to apply God's economy, which is what God intended with his Gift.

In terms of Euthanasia you make a wrong presumption. Euthanasia is not always performed at the consent of the person. Most often it is doctors and/or family members who make this decision for the person (who is unconscious or otherwise not able to express their intent. So-called "Living Wills" do not resolve this problem since all that establishes is the person's view at the time he enacted the document. Has he changed his mind? Perhaps, but the doctors and/or family makes the decision for him. While is this true for all end-of-life statements including those asking to be removed from extraordinary measures to be allowed to die naturally, at least this is a request to be allowed to die naturally. A document that says "kill me" is not acceptable. Euthanasia is killing a person unnaturally, a deliberate act of killing. We normally call this murder.

Your thinking about the role of government to not intrude upon personal decisions is also deeply flawed. Society and nations have a moral obligation under God to promote, support, and facilitate through its laws and powers the dignity of the human person. This is Church teaching.

The Catholic Catechism states:

SOCIAL JUSTICE

1928 Society ensures social justice when it provides the conditions that allow associations or individuals to obtain what is their due, according to their nature and their vocation. Social justice is linked to the common good and the exercise of authority.

I. RESPECT FOR THE HUMAN PERSON

1929 Social justice can be obtained only in respecting the transcendent dignity of man. The person represents the ultimate end of society, which is ordered to him:

What is at stake is the dignity of the human person, whose defense and promotion have been entrusted to us by the Creator, and to whom the men and women at every moment of history are strictly and responsibly in debt.

1930 Respect for the human person entails respect for the rights that flow from his dignity as a creature. These rights are prior to society and must be recognized by it. They are the basis of the moral legitimacy of every authority: by flouting them, or refusing to recognize them in its positive legislation, a society undermines its own moral legitimacy. If it does not respect them, authority can rely only on force or violence to obtain obedience from its subjects. It is the Church's role to remind men of good will of these rights and to distinguish them from unwarranted or false claims.

1931 Respect for the human person proceeds by way of respect for the principle that "everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as 'another self,' above all bearing in mind his life and the means necessary for living it with dignity." No legislation could by itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and selfishness which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies. Such behavior will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a "neighbor," a brother.

1932 The duty of making oneself a neighbor to others and actively serving them becomes even more urgent when it involves the disadvantaged, in whatever area this may be. "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me."

Euthanasia

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.

Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.

Suicide

2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

As I have already written before there is no such thing as a separation of Church and State. Our morality (whether evolved in Church or not) is inseparable from our political activities. In fact, politics is the expression of our moral values. The only question is "What are our moral values?"

You say, "A government’s role is to protect the people’s individual human rights, protect private property and "blindly" enforce the law."

Well, the Church, who speaks for God, says that government as a obligation to promote and protect human dignity and God's purpose for government trump man's definitions. That protection of human dignity is to protect and respect life at all levels. There are moral issues that cannot be compromised if society is to be healthy. While it may not be appropriate to make fornication illegal, the protection of life is absolute and must be protected by government. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness was the clarion call of our experiment. Nothing else is possible without life.

While an individual may want to die by euthanasia or suicide, the society cannot promote their desires because it depreciates the dignity of all men. The government has an obligation to legislate against these evil behaviors for the good of the individual and of society.

The same is true about marriage. Marriage is a sacred estate established by God and is the foundation of society. For government to allow homosexual marriage this does violence not only to the sacredness of marriage, but undermines the foundation of family and of society, which leads to the fall of society. This has happened before in ancient Rome. Homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual perversions was a major factor in the demise of Rome.

Frankly, Jonas, you need to stop reading Libertarian literature and start reading the Catechism. Your Faith must be the springboard for all else. Politics must be filtered through the Catholic Worldview. Libertarianism as a whole is inconsistent with a Christian worldview.

I might add, what I said before, that radical individualism is a characteristic of Satanism. God's economy is not radical individualism, but is a communitarianism, and no, that is not communism or socialism, it is family, a paterfamilias (meaning father head of the family).

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary