(LifeSiteNews) — Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada supports abortion up until birth, for any reason or for no reason at all, and funded by your taxpayer dollars.

To be clear for a moment about what that means: A baby in the womb likely begins to feel pain in the first trimester, and certainly by 24 weeks. Last year in Iowa, a premature baby survived after being born at 21 weeks. Arthur supports abortion—a violent and profoundly painful process—even when the baby can survive outside the womb. Even when she sucks her thumb and recognizes her mother’s voice.

Thus, when Joyce Arthur calls something “cruel,” you can be sure that something approximating the opposite is happening. This, after all, is someone who thinks abortion is compassionate healthcare (the crushing of baby skulls notwithstanding), and that objecting to the violence of abortion is reprehensible.

Sure enough, Arthur has surfaced to bestow her wisdom on the Canadian public once again—although this time, she is advocating for killing at the end of life’s spectrum rather than the beginning. CBC’s June 1 headline makes it clear that they agree with her: “Manitoba MAID law ‘punishing’ 94-year-old woman, pro-choice group says.”

To translate, Arthur is claiming that because a 94-year-old woman in Steinbach, Manitoba, does not qualify for euthanasia under Canada’s currently (very permissive) regime, the law is “punishing” that woman.

“It’s a mark of cruelty and trauma that’s inflicted on her,” Arthur told the CBC. “She’s having to resort to desperate methods like stopping her heart medication and antibiotics. She is forced to live in a hospital rather than a nice palliative care center, far from home. So the law is actually punishing her. And it’s really, really unjust and really unfortunate.”

READ: Suicide organization pours millions into downplaying euthanasia horror stories

In Arthur’s world, it seems, having guidelines around who can and cannot be killed by lethal injection is “punishing” those who do not qualify; it is “cruelty” and “trauma” not to kill her. Our euthanasia regime has become so infamous around the world that several countries have decided not to legalize it for fear of turning into Canada, but to Arthur, the law is one of “cruelty” for… not being permissive enough.

The intent of the CBC article is obviously to place pressure on those Manitoba doctors and institutions who are reluctant to kill their patients, presumably because that is not why they joined the profession. The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, the CBC noted, is now “asking the province to repeal the Medical Assistance in Dying (Protection for Health Professionals and Others) Act.”

“In March, CBC reported that Manitoba denies assisted dying at five times the national rate,” the state broadcaster noted, with the clear implication that this is a bad thing. “In 2024 — the last reported year — Manitoba was the only province where MAID was used fewer times than in 2021, when chronic illnesses were added to acceptable conditions for approval. Manitoba has a total of 20 MAID assessors and providers, the fewest of any province outside of Prince Edward Island. Three work outside of Winnipeg.”

The subtext there is clear: That’s not enough.

This, by the way, is the tactic being used by Dying with Dignity, the Canadian press (the CBC in particular), and now, unsurprisingly, Joyce Arthur: Claiming that not killing someone via euthanasia makes society directly responsible for the suffering of that person. Thus, someone suffering from disease, the ailments of old age, or mental illness is suffering not because of those things—but because the government will not legalize, fund, and facilitate their death by lethal injection.

This is a perverse inversion of the truth. But from Joyce Arthur, that is par for the course.