Decisions about assisted dying should be made on a “secular basis”, a Government minister said ahead of MPs voting on the issue on Friday.
Home Office minister Seema Malhotra acknowledged that “people have their faiths” but decisions in Parliament should be “based on the evidence”.
Her comments came after Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she would not support a change in the law on assisted dying because of her Muslim faith.
Ms Malhotra said she would vote against the legislation on Friday, telling Sky News she was “concerned about the challenges, the pressures that could be put on vulnerable people” if there was a change in the law.
She said: “People have their faiths but I think what is important is that when we are making decisions as Members of Parliament we are making them on a secular basis because that’s the way our Parliament is designed in terms of making decisions based on the evidence and arguing the case for law, the advantages, the disadvantages, the concerns in Parliament.
“And I think that is an important principle to me.
“I want to see that we have a debate that is in a way that everybody feels that their voice can be heard, that they can be respected for the views that they hold, that Parliament is able to make a decision on this on Friday and then that we know the Government will abide by the will of Parliament.”
Justice Secretary Ms Mahmood has previously stated she will oppose the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, telling the Times: “As a Muslim, I have an unshakeable belief in the sanctity and value of human life.”
The Bill, which has been put forward by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater, faces its first Commons test on Friday.
Campaigner and broadcaster Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill and has led calls for a change in the law, urged more MPs to be honest if their objections to the Bill were religiously motivated.
She told LBC: “What worries me is the number of people who are guided by their faith – that’s fine, that’s their choice, whether they’re Evangelical, Christian or Catholic.
“Yes, they have the right to choose but please be honest about your real motivation.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel