Canadian Euthanasia Zealots Now Openly Talk About Killing Babies

Remember how the ‘experts’ laughed at anyone raising the slippery slope arguments that speed-running the end-of-life process for terminally ill would bleed into OTHER situations where people were just inconvenient?

Turns out, those ‘experts’ were either diabolically dishonest, or hopeless naive about human nature.

Poor people are being killed on the Canadian taxpayer’s dime. So are depressed people. Elderly people with no home care are pushed into it. An elderly catholic priest with a broken hip was agressively harassed — TWICE! — by people who tried to push the doctor-assisted-death option despite knowing his moral objections. He claimed that the pain he was experiencing from his injury in one of these conversations almost overcame his natural reason.

And the 80+ woman who had been pressured into suicide because nobody could help her with showers, and she couldn’t get accepted to a hospice program tried to back out of it after she had given her consent. But she was murdered anyway. Yes, ‘murdered’. What OTHER word does the English language have for ending the life of an innocent person who wants to remain alive?

It didn’t take long for those ironclad assurances of patient consent to get hopelessly murky.

But at least there was room for an argument about whether a threshold for consent had been reached.

But what possible consent can a baby give about having his or her life snuffed out? One doctor is bringing light to a horrific proposal being considered by Carney’s filibuster-proof liberal majority, in expanding MAiD far beyond its original scope when Trudeau launched it in his first year as PM back in 2016.

A Quebec physician reportedly suggested assisted suicide for infants up to one year old with severe conditions.

“Babies cannot speak, cannot consent, and cannot ask for help. If we cannot draw the line here, I’m not sure where medical professionals imagine the line to be.” pic.twitter.com/FPZKEzC3Qu

— Juno News (@junonewscom) May 13, 2026

TREATMENT.

The College of Physicians is invoking the word ‘TREATMENT’ in describing the use of MAiD in the context of infants in their first year with certain sorts of illness.

Killing an infirm child is being framed as ‘TREATMENT’.

As ClashDaily has said from the beginning, it is TREATMENT in precisely the same way that Germany’s 1939 euthanasia program was ‘Treatment’ for disabled children.

Beginning in October 1939, public health authorities began to encourage parents of children with disabilities to admit their young children to one of a number of specially designated pediatric clinics throughout Germany and Austria. In reality, the clinics were children’s killing wards. There, specially recruited medical staff murdered their young charges by lethal overdoses of medication or by starvation.
At first, medical professionals and clinic administrators included only infants and toddlers in the operation. As the scope of the measure widened, they included youths up to 17 years of age. Conservative estimates suggest that at least 10,000 physically and mentally disabled German children perished as a result of the child “euthanasia” program during the war years. — Holocaust Museum

As you might expect, this ‘euthanasia’ program grew to include the gassing of adults, and grew to become one of history’s most notorious War Crimes.

But the logic of what they were doing, in killing undesirable people for the alleged ‘greater good’ never changed.

Congrats Canada. Not only did the Liberals invite a WWII Nazi fighter to be applauded in Trudeau’s Parliament, but you are following the trail of moral justification for mass murder blazed by no less than Hitler’s inner circle itself.

How long will it be until the middle of the flag is replaced by a distinctive shape OTHER than that Maple Leaf?

And for the record — there is ZERO moral distinction between killing a babe in your arms and one in the womb.

Our arguments for defending both rely on precisely the same moral assumptions. The other side’s arguments for defending one and not the other require a lot of hand-waving and philosophical gymnastics.