Democrat Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker Signs Bill Legalizing Assisted Suicide for Terminally Ill

[mystery-ak]

Democrat Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker Signs Bill Legalizing Assisted Suicide for Terminally Ill

Katherine Hamilton 12 Dec 2025

Democrat Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker expanded his state’s culture of death on Friday by signing a bill into law legalizing assisted suicide for terminally ill people.

Illinois is now the 12th state, plus Washington, DC, that allows physicians to assist terminally ill people in killing themselves — all in the name of “choice,” compassion, and easing end-of-life suffering. Pritzker signed the bill despite concerns from opponents that such a law could be a slippery slope (look no further than Canada) and could be used to coerce people with disabilities and financial hardships to choose death.

“I have been deeply impacted by the stories of Illinoisans or their loved ones who have suffered from a devastating terminal illness — and I have been moved by their dedication to standing up for freedom and choice at the end of life in the midst of personal heartbreak,” Pritzker said in a statement.

“Today, Illinois honors their strength and courage by enacting legislation that enables patients faced with debilitating terminal illnesses to make a decision, in consultation with a doctor, that helps them avoid unnecessary pain and suffering at the end of their lives,” he continued.

more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/12/12/democrat-illinois-gov-jb-pritzker-signs-bill-legalizing-assisted-suicide-for-terminally-ill/

[libertybele]

Here I've been slamming Canada, but there are quite a few states that allow "death with dignity".  I am truly flabbergasted.

https://deathwithdignity.org/states/

[DefiantMassRINO]

[Canuck Conservative]

I know suicide is wrong in every religion, BUT ...

What we're talking about here is people at the end-stages of their lives, so it's a practical matter of sparing them further pain.

It doesn't (and shouldn't) include healthy people that are merely depressed.

But if you're in your 80s and are facing recurring cancer, let's be honest, at that point you've lived a full Life, and maybe you don't want to spend the last few years throwing up every day from chemo drugs.

It's easy to tell others to "just go on" while we are healthy, but it can be very different for those really suffering ... just saying, it's not all so clear-cut ...

[Kamaji]

I know suicide is wrong in every religion, BUT ...

What we're talking about here is people at the end-stages of their lives, so it's a practical matter of sparing them further pain.

It doesn't (and shouldn't) include healthy people that are merely depressed.

But if you're in your 80s and are facing recurring cancer, let's be honest, at that point you've lived a full Life, and maybe you don't want to spend the last few years throwing up every day from chemo drugs.

It's easy to tell others to "just go on" while we are healthy, but it can be very different for those really suffering ... just saying, it's not all so clear-cut ...

[LMAO]

I know suicide is wrong in every religion, BUT ...

What we're talking about here is people at the end-stages of their lives, so it's a practical matter of sparing them further pain.

It doesn't (and shouldn't) include healthy people that are merely depressed.

But if you're in your 80s and are facing recurring cancer, let's be honest, at that point you've lived a full Life, and maybe you don't want to spend the last few years throwing up every day from chemo drugs.

It's easy to tell others to "just go on" while we are healthy, but it can be very different for those really suffering ... just saying, it's not all so clear-cut ...

@Canuck Conservative

Excellent post

[Luis Gonzalez]

TDS is a terminal illness.

Just saying.

 

[Right_in_Virginia]

I know suicide is wrong in every religion, BUT ..

... let's turn the legitimacy of suicide over to the government to define, endorse and facilitate.

What we're talking about here is people at the end-stages of their lives, so it's a practical matter of sparing them further pain.

Moving from practical today to mandatory tomorrow is only a skip away.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I’ve never understood the idea of criminalizing suicide.

If you’re not dead, then you didn’t commit a crime.

If you’re successful, what are they going to charge you with?

 

[Luis Gonzalez]

Moving from practical today to mandatory tomorrow is only a skip away.

Any government willing to go to the extent of mandatory is not concerned with easing into it via intermediary steps.

[Fishrrman]

Time to go into business manufacturing these:

Something like fifteen states already have MAID now, I sense that before too long it will be most of them.

Get in on the ground floor.
Folks will be dyin' to buy 'em...

[Right_in_Virginia]

Any government willing to go to the extent of mandatory is not concerned with easing into it via intermediary steps.

Nonsense --- the democrats are masters at creating the right moment to make fundamental changes to the culture with the least resistance.

How is it conservatives still don't know this?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Nonsense --- the democrats are masters at creating the right moment to make fundamental changes to the culture with the least resistance.

How is it conservatives still don't know this?

So you think we can ease into the government mandating when you die?

[andy58-in-nh]

I’ve never understood the idea of criminalizing suicide.

If you’re not dead, then you didn’t commit a crime.

If you’re successful, what are they going to charge you with?

I get that. The libertarian guy inside me asks the same question. We do own our own lives, after all. Or ought to.

The problem comes about when a doctor gets involved, in violation of their primary oath to "first, do no harm", and is then sanctioned by the state to provide access to self-execution, as though it were just another medical service.

That's an ethical and moral conundrum in itself, but what's on the next ramp down the slippery slope?   Will Medicare be forced to cover the "procedure" if it is deemed "medically necessary" to avoid pain and suffering?

Crazy, I know. But see: Canada.   

[Luis Gonzalez]

The problem comes about when a doctor gets involved, in violation of their primary oath to "first, do no harm", and is then sanctioned by the state to provide access to self-execution, as though it were just another medical service.

Would it be to do harm when a patient is terminally ill, or ending the harm?

[andy58-in-nh]

Would it be to do harm when a patient is terminally ill, or ending the harm?

@Luis Gonzalez

Good question, any answer to which must be both philosophical and definitional. Which means: it's hard as hell.

A terminally-ill patient is by definition already suffering from a disorder that causes bodily harm. The philosophical question is two-fold.

First: by ending the patient's life, is the harm being ended, or accelerated (unto death)? One could reasonably make either argument.

By ending the patient's life, the harm caused by the disease ends along with the patient. But the harm caused by the illness to that point is simply being sped to its natural conclusion by the process of suicide. Unless... the disease or illness were to go into remission - which happens, sometimes for no known reason. Or a new drug suddenly makes what was once impossible, now possible. No matter how remote a chance may be, it is still a chance.

Secondly: to engage the services of a medical professional in ending one's life is to ask a practitioner to agree to act in defiance of their education, training, and professional ethics.  Such a meeting of the minds between doctor and patient may clearly be made as a matter of voluntary choice. But the cost involved is not limited to a bill for services rendered, but necessarily has a moral and ethical dimension as well for the doctor, and also, perhaps for the family and friends of the patient, who might reasonably wonder: was this right, and what might have been, if...?   

Finally: irrespective of pain and suffering - which are very real, tangible, awful things - second-guessing God is always a hazardous enterprise.     

Once again - yours is a great question to which I will not claim to have a perfect and definitive answer.

[GtHawk]

I know suicide is wrong in every religion, BUT ...

What we're talking about here is people at the end-stages of their lives, so it's a practical matter of sparing them further pain.

It doesn't (and shouldn't) include healthy people that are merely depressed.

But if you're in your 80s and are facing recurring cancer, let's be honest, at that point you've lived a full Life, and maybe you don't want to spend the last few years throwing up every day from chemo drugs.

It's easy to tell others to "just go on" while we are healthy, but it can be very different for those really suffering ... just saying, it's not all so clear-cut ...

Yes I think people who are in end stage, with severe pain and no hope should be able to make that choice, it’s between them and their maker. That being said other countries are using their  assisted  suicide laws to eliminate Downs Syndrome children and adults and others, not  because of quality of life, or no hope diagnosis, but because they are a drain their health care system and society. And that is just plain evil and abhorrent.

[GtHawk]

I’ve never understood the idea of criminalizing suicide.

If you’re not dead, then you didn’t commit a crime.

If you’re successful, what are they going to charge you with?

Obviously they can’t do anything to a successful suicide, but anyone who assisted that suicide in anyway can and has been criminally charged in the past, Dr. Kevorkian comes to mind.

[libertybele]

Obviously they can’t do anything to a successful suicide, but anyone who assisted that suicide in anyway can and has been criminally charged in the past, Dr. Kevorkian comes to mind.

Dr. Kevorkian is a prime example --   He started this gambit and it wasn't popular then  ... now the population is aging, so has it become more acceptable? 12 states have already accepted assisted suicide.