BS"D
"Ain Dochin Nefesh..." 
Support of Either Major Candidate in NJ's Gubernatorial Race  Threatens to Proliferate Assisted Suicide Laws
27 Mar-Cheshvan, 5782 / November 1, '21
By Rabbi Noson Shmuel Leiter
The
 Targum Yonoson on "Lo Sirtzach" (Shmos 20:13) explains that not only 
are we prohibited from murder itself, but also from partnership and 
association with murderers.* Flaunting this Torah imperative results in 
the next generation continuing in that lethal path. 
{* Cf. Makkos 10a on Hoshea 6}
The
 world just witnessed the barbaric murder of two-year old toddler Alta 
Fixsler HY"D. Alta, valiantly struggling with brain-damage from birth, 
was killed by the British healthcare system. Alta, not even a British 
citizen, was held hostage and murdered because a British judge deemed 
her life worthy of being ended, against the unrelenting efforts of her 
family and supporters around the world. This, in spite of alternative 
treatment options overseas that would have extended and possibly saved 
her life - and saved the U.K. money as well.  Thus, England's  legal 
vendetta against Alta, unlike some of their previous crusades, wasn't 
about Greed, but "Creed:" the redefinition of murder.
This
 movement of state-mandated murder didn't start with Alta, or with 
previous victims of systemic British barbarism, like Alfie Evans and 
Charlie Gard. It started years earlier and "progressed" to those murders
 of innocent children.  What's more frightening is that across the Pond, the
 U.S. is not far behind. And, as is the case with the overall moral 
collapse on a range of issues, much "Hakaras haTov" (gratitude) is owed 
to both major political parties for that, specifically in regard to the 
advance of "Assisted Suicide."
The
 threat of the legalization of assisted suicide is such that over fifty 
Rabbis from across the Orthodox spectrum signed a statement against it. 
Therein, they state that it's prohibited to vote for a political 
candidate who either supports or previously supported assisted suicide, 
EVEN if already became law. If voters don't show politicians that 
previous acts have consequences, we can't expect to deter them - OR OTHERS - in the future.
Text of the statement:
"Regarding attempts to pass “Death with Dignity” legislation:
The
 chiyuv (Torah injunction) of “Lo sa'amod al dam re’echa”, obligates 
everyone to do what he or she can, to help prevent assisted suicide 
and/or euthanasia.
Allowing the legalization of “assisted 
suicide”, even if this particular law in practice would only result in 
assisting a suicide and not euthanasia, is to allow shefichas-domim 
(bloodshed). Furthermore even rendering such actions not being subject 
to prosecution, is allowing shefichas-domim (bloodshed), al achas kama 
ve'kama (how much more so), in cases of assisted suicide leading to 
euthanasia.
Voting on the basis of this issue.*
{technically, should be punctuated with a colon - NSL}
This obligation would include:
1)
 Thus*, when voting for any public official, this issue must be 
considered as top priority, certainly overriding financial 
considerations, government programs, etc. By voting for people who 
support these laws, we become accountable for their actions. This ruling
 would still apply even if these laws were to be passed, we would still 
be forbidden to vote for legislators who voted for these laws. This is 
the most important way to fulfill our obligation.
{*
 The word "thus" here clearly refers back to the first two paragraphs, 
as if the previous two single-line phrases are to be read, grammatically
 speaking, as headers. None of my grammatical comments here are to be 
taken to alter or detract from the imperative meaning of any of these 
phrases. NSL}
2) Urging one’s legislators to vote against 
these bills, if and when they arise[1]and to urge the governor to veto 
such bill, were it to pass the legislature.
3) Helping in 
efforts to repeal such laws, in areas[2] where such legislation was 
already passed. Even a few votes can make a major difference, both by 
legislators and the public—sometimes the vote of a single legislator can
 decide the fate of these laws—as is evidenced by the recent vote in the
 New Jersey State Assembly (in November 2014), where an assisted suicide
 bill was passed by just one vote. We have seen in several recent races 
in Jewish neighborhoods, that even a handful of votes can make the 
difference in the outcome of the election[3]
Furthermore, some 
legislators keep track of the calls that are made to their offices on 
particular controversial issues, and vote according to their results.
May
 the Creator of all life grace us with the merit to save innocent lives,
 fulfilling our role as an ohr legoyim (light unto the nations). In that
 merit, may we help usher in the Final Redemption by Moshiach 
Tzidkeinu."
Signatures of  Leading Roshei Yeshiva, Rabbonim, and Poskim: 
Mordechai
 Chaim Auerbach - Boruch Hirschfeld - Avrohom Reich - Eliyahu Ben-Haim -
 Zalman Leib Hollander - Dovid Ribiat - Haim Benoliel  - Shmuel 
Kamenetsky - Yosef Yitzchok Rosenfeld  -  Gad Bouskila - Yosef Meir 
Kantor - Chaim Schabes -  Yitzchok M. Braun -  Elya Nota Katz  - Dovid 
Schustal  - Shlomo Breslauer - Eliezer Langer - Yaakov Shulman -  
Eliyahu Brog - Yeshaye Gedalye Kaufman -  Moshe Silberberg - Simcha 
Bunim Cohen - Amram Klein - Moshe Soloveitchik - Yitzchok Cohen -  
Shloime Ben Zion Kokis - Yitzchok Sorotzkin  - Moshe Donnebaum -  
Grainom Lazewnik -  Tzvi Steinberg -  Eytan Feiner  -  Moshe Tuvia Lieff
 - Elazar Mayer Teitz Menachem Fisher - Shmuel Miller - Elya Ber 
Wachtfogel - Noson Yermia Goldstein - Avrohom Yaakov Nelkenbaum -  
Boruch Hersh Waldman - Avrohom Gordimer - Yechiel Perr -  Moshe Weissman
 Shmuel Gorelick -  Steven Pruzansky -  Benjamin Yudin -  Moshe Green - 
 Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff - Yeruchum Zeilberger -  Yisroel Dovid Harfenes
 -  Gavriel Zinner "
{The footnotes on psak were not reproduced here for technical reasons. NSL}
~~~~~~~~
New Jersey:
Democratic
 NJ Governor Murphy signed Assisted Suicide into law, and it went into 
effect in '19. The bill, euphemistically marketed as "Aid In Dying," 
legalized the deliberate murder of "terminally ill" patients who 
ostensibly, at some point, expressed a desire to die.  Facilities 
ostensibly dedicated to healthcare are, under certain circumstances 
(conditions being broader than most people imagine), allowed to actively
 kill [poison] the qualifying victims, by "law."
As
 dominant and far-gone as the NJ Democratic Party is, they were unable 
to pass this assisted suicide on their own. Legalization required a few 
Republicans.  After repeated battles for about seven years, "Aid In 
Dying" did pass, but only by exactly one vote in each house of the NJ 
legislature; bipartisanship at it's worst.
Of 
course, it's not hard to understand that a vote for Governor Murphy, who
 signed the aforementioned legislation of state sanctioned murder, 
broadcasts a tolerance for such a stance. However, contrary to popular 
opinion, that fact does not translate into a rationale to support his 
Republican opponent, former Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli. 
As Assemblyman, he twice voted for assisted suicide: for A2270 
on Nov.13, '14; and for A2451 on Oct/20, '16. (He had left the legislature by the time it passed into law.
Ciattarelli also spoke out in defence of his position in 2014, which reported:
"...
Ciattarelli
 — who, along with Schepisi, also a yea vote, arguably took the greatest
 risk in voting against their caucus, given ongoing chatter about their 
future political prospects — argued that he thinks the issue’s “time has
 arrived.”*
{* 
Interestingly, "the time has come" is the same non-reason that Heck 
Commission of Sen. McCain provided for recommending that Selective 
Service be expanded to women, despite all of the evidence of the 
disastrous consequences thereof. - NSL)
“This is one of those 
votes where people are coming at it from different angles, and I don’t 
think anyone coming at it in their own way is wrong,*” Ciattarelli, who 
found his name in the mix for a U.S. Senate run earlier this year, said.
  ..." (https://observer.com/2014/11/aid-in-dying-vote-deeply-personal-for-two-republicans-who-voted-against-party-line) 
{* One wonders if the aforementioned British "different angle" would similarly pass his bar. NSL}
Autopilot
 NJ Republicans, and those who unrelentingly support the ostensibly 
"lesser" evil, may benefit by contrasting the laws of liberal N.Y., 
Maryland -- AND MASSACHUSETTS - which all prohibit assisted suicide - 
with the extremist postion of their GOP republican candidate for 
Governor, which is to the left of those leftist-dominated states. Think 
about that.
Nationwide Impact:
In
 light of the above, it is apparent that a vote for Ciattarelli will 
send a message to Republican politicians around the country that voting 
to legalize murder has no noteworthy downside. Why is that so dangerous 
-- right now? Because  there are states that are dominated by Democrats 
even more so than NJ, states where the Democrats similarly don't have 
the votes to pass assisted suicide.  If even just a few leftist 
Republicans see that  NJ elected a Republican (the assisted suicide 
Lobby will most definitely show them the numbers), those Republicans 
will assume that as long as they can convince the voters that they are 
better than their Democratic rival, they can vote for assisted suicide -
 and not only keep their jobs, but even get elected governor.
"...
 Pendergrass said there are 53 sponsors in the 141-member House this 
year and 17 sponsors in the 47-member Senate. Gov. Larry Hogan (R) said 
this month that he is “willing to look at both sides of that issue....”
That
 alarming report appeared just before Corona hit the U.S. in early 2020 
C.E. Corona delayed or slowed the passage of such legislation. However, 
we are now forewarned that Maryland is precipitously close to passing 
assisted suicide. Governor Hogan, a leftwing Republican, vice-signaled 
his inclination towards "considering" assisted suicide. He will be 
encouraged to sign such a law - IF he sees that, in states in which 
assisted suicide passed with GOP support, such Republicans need only the
 "lesser evil" narrative to win thereafter.
Votes for Ciattarelli, particularly
 from religious communities, will provide people like Gov. Hogan that 
desired comfort level to encourage him to push assisted suicide into 
law.
BOTTOM LINE: A vote for Jack 
Ciattarelli shows that a vote for state-mandated murder doesn't have 
harmful political consequences. NJ will thus progress to increasingly 
more lethal legislation, and spread assisted suicide legislation to 
other states, endangering the entire country.
 
As Jews, we
 also must recognize that a vote for either Murphy 
or Ciattarelli projects the erroneous image that Jews support or 
tolerate murder; worse - state mandated murder.   
Another 
palatable option does exist: a write-in vote. The selection of a name to
 write in may be made with an eye towards (a) demonstrating to the 
Democrats that one opposes their particular mutation of the anti-G-d 
agenda, and towards (b) messaging the Republicans that they cannot 
continue nominating candidates who expect us to vote for them regardless
 of how lethal their legislative profile is.  A write-in vote is not 
just the moral choice, but the most politically beneficial. (Another 
option, less effective of course, is to leave that column on the ballot 
blank.)
In the merit of alerting others who  seek the truth, may we ourselves always find it.