Menu

Letters to the Editor

My experience fighting assisted suicide

Keith Rothfus • Jan 12, 2026
The interview on assisted suicide in the Dec. 26 issue was a timely commentary on a series of new laws that give in to the belief that there are lives not worth living.  How many times do we hear news that a friend or an acquaintance died by suicide? Our hearts break. “Oh no,” we whisper, “if only I had known how bad it was, could I have made a difference?” Would we feel any better if that person had died by suicide with the help of a physician? In my final term in Congress, I and several other members tried to encourage the House to use its legal authority to block Washington, D.C.’s assisted suicide law that became effective in 2017. However, the institutional pro-life lobby was not asking Congress to act. There were concerns that if the vote did not pass, it would set a bad precedent.   The lesson learned from this experience: Legislators need to hear the voices of those opposed to assisted suicide legislation. Americans have the freedom to speak and petition their government.   — Keith Rothfus, Sewickley, Pennsylvania, former U.S. Representative, Pennsylvania’s Twelfth Congressional District, 2013-2019

Naming assisted suicide for what it is

Jacqueline M. Nolan-Haley • Jan 12, 2026
The interview on the future of assisted suicide (“Devalued to Death,” Dec. 26 issue) asks whether it is inevitable that assisted suicide will become common and legal in this country. The answer may depend upon the success of marketing techniques that separate the idea of assisted suicide from the idea of killing.  What the California Medicine Journal wrote about abortion in 1970 is relevant today with suicide: “Since the old ethic has not yet been fully displaced it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing which continues to be socially abhorrent…” Today, the new ethic associates assisted suicide with autonomy and compassionate care. Like abortion, it is put forth under “socially impeccable auspices.” But the back story needs to be told — the targeting of people with disabilities, the elderly, and inconvenient others. Assisted suicide needs to be recognized for what it is — a threat to vulnerable populations, an affront to human dignity, and a violation of federal anti-discrimination laws. — Jacqueline M. Nolan-Haley, New York

A call to mental disarmament

James Hanna • Dec 22, 2025
In an interview question to Matt Valliére in the Dec. 26 Angelus, Pablo Kay mentioned that “some people compare the assisted suicide issue with abortion.” That’s fine, but I submit the issue may also be framed through the pacifist lens of war, in this case the war on human dignity, which is every bit as militaristic, since it involves people using tools to take a targeted human life.  The solution? As the late Sister M. Fides Shepperson wrote: “Mental disarmament must precede military.” Minds must be changed, even perhaps one single mind, as in the case of Delaware’s legislation. Civil authority must legislate for the common good. In what world would the Canadian legislation be considered in the common good? There is a reason the dignity of the human person is the keystone of Catholic social teaching, and our bishops and priests should be among those leading the civilized world to mental disarmament. — James K. Hanna, McMurray, Pennsylvania

Of euthanasia and euphemisms

Mark Sullivan • Dec 22, 2025
The interview with Matt Vallière in the Dec. 26 issue reminded me of a sign a co-worker had in their cubicle at my first job called “How [Poop] Happens.” In colorful language, it describes how a bad idea or plan becomes “good” through a series of euphemisms and altered wording.  This has happened with euthanasia. Nobody is for prolonged suffering or limits on our autonomy, but on the surface they sound “good.” There will be advocates claiming that assisted suicide is “noble” or that there were no other options. But we know that suffering can’t be entirely removed, and that our autonomy is flawed in that we make bad decisions and then stand on our heads to make justifications for them.  Legislation that protects the dignity of human life is important, but even definitive legislative victories never seem to be that definitive. As Catholics, we can’t let legislation do all our work. We have the responsibility to show that suffering is not some stand-alone “bad” thing. With suffering comes mercy and compassion and purification.  The purest and most powerful autonomy brings with it sacrifice, love, and unexpected joy. The postponed mountain biking trip or unplanned long car ride to visit a sick relative has an unexpected depth that we would never experience if we were only doing the math. — Mark Sullivan, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

‘Pluribus’ and appeal of not thinking

Maggie Cardenas • Dec 15, 2025
I’m glad that Angelus included a review of “Pluribus” in the Dec. 12 issue, since it seems to be the most talked-about show among my real-life and Facebook friends this year. Amy Welborn did a nice job of analyzing the show. But as the season progresses, I think it’s becoming clear that the show really is about AI and happiness. It’s made me think about how today’s tech giants are basically proposing a life made easier by AI as the key to happiness. In other words, that we shouldn’t bother with thinking, or even learning how to think. Pretty soon, what will we need school for? Or books? I don’t know what scares me more: the lie of this proposal, or how quickly we’re being conditioned to believe that lie. — Maggie Cardenas, Manhattan Beach

A column that matters

Chuy Garcia • Dec 01, 2025
Thank you to Archbishop Gomez for his Nov. 28 column, which I think offered a balanced and honest assessment of immigration reform. I don't think many people will actually read the U.S. bishops’ statement on immigration that he references, which wasn’t very interesting because it was written by more than 200 clerics.  But the archbishop’s words matter to people, and he points out real problems with the Trump administration’s cruel policy. One is that it seems to intentionally aim to hurt and separate hardworking families. Coming to this country illegally in search of a better life (with the hope of achieving legal status) is not the same as stealing a car or abusing someone. The government should stop acting like it is.  — Chuy Garcia, La Puente

SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

To submit by mail, send to Letters, Angelus, 3424 Wilshire Blvd. 4th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90010-2241. Include a telephone number and address. To submit online, click below.

WRITE A LETTER

SUBMIT A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Continue the conversation! We welcome your comments. Anonymous letters, personal attacks, or libellous comments will not be published. Please complete all the required fields in the form below.

  • Contact Information

  • Your Letter

  • Letters must be no more than 300 words. We reserve the right to edit for style, brevity, and clarity.
reset button icon

Start your day with Always Forward!

A daily email newsletter to help you better understand the Church and the world.