Letters: Balance in views of Black Lives Matter

Balance in views of BLM

Rob Rattenbury's phrasing "Black Lives Matter and other anarchic causes blighting our world stage at present" (Chronicle, July 6) cannot go by without comment.

Rob, a former cop, rightly upholds the right of law enforcement to enact their roles safely and those not respecting that, when tragedy strikes, richly deserve the sentencing they get. Nothing can address the loss, as was the case with Constable Hunt, felt by family, friends, the police community and most Kiwis.

However, to classify the Black Lives Matter cause as anarchist, as he did, leaves one with the feeling that Rob, as a former policeman, seems to have inherited some of that very oppressive culture that clearly is part of US policing, which BLM rightly addresses.

I think his comment is atrocious. There are a minority who are not content with just peaceful protest, just as there are a minority of cops in the US and here in New Zealand who do not abide by protocol in enacting their duties.

Placing a whole movement in one basket is as unjustified as any comment that all cops are bad cops. A balanced point of view wouldn't go amiss when making comment on this matter.
PAUL BABER
Whanganui

Words matter

In his reply to John Malcolm, Bob Walker states that "The matter under discussion is called Death with Dignity for the Terminally Ill" (Letters, July 2). This is political spin and sloganeering. The matter under discussion is called euthanasia and assisted suicide, and Mr Walker knows it.

The "Death with Dignity" slogan is about making people feel better about the killing of human beings, and duping people into supporting such killing. It is funny how the proponents try to make it an accepted mindset that only by killing yourself with a doctor's assistance or being killed by a doctor can a terminally ill person "die with dignity". That is a lie.

Meanwhile, those people who have suffered through one to three days of agony or gross discomfort while dying from these medically applied or supplied drugs, might disagree about the whole "dignity" claim.

There is, as always, the claim that it is only for the "terminally ill", which shows euthanasia proponents to be incredibly naïve and uniformed about their own topic, or uninterested in the facts that disagree with their position.

Mr Walker uses the word "choice", of course, and says that those who don't agree with euthanasia and assisted suicide should not take away the "choice" of others. Yet Mr Walker does not address the fact that everywhere that these practices have been allowed or legalised, people who do not choose to be killed have had their choice taken away, along with their right to life.

It is interesting to note that the reasons given for why a person may want assisted suicide tend to be the same reasons as those for most suicides, like fear and hopelessness, yet we are supposed to support one and oppose the other?
It is said how you face death is as important as how you face life. Let us support the elderly, infirm, disabled, to face life and death with true dignity, and not try to sweep their problems out of our sight with "euthanasia and assisted suicide".
KA BENFELL
Gonville

Click here to email us a letter.