Tangle writes:
Given that 74% of the country want it, I reckon those with strong religious views should have abstained.
I think it is perfectly fair for people to vote based on their religious beliefs. If there are protections for a secular government then courts can step in if religious rights have been violated, but there shouldn't be a religious based criteria for taking away votes.
What I do celebrate is the ability of a society to guide itself through democratic means. The difficulty we all have in western style democracies is determining which rights are foundational and not up for a vote. An independent judicial branch is one of the greatest inventions in democracy for protecting those rights, but there still needs to be respect for the legislative as well.
Personally, I do think people should be able to seek out medical help for a terminal illness. In my state in the US, there are no protections for assisted dying. However, we do have hospice care which functions in the same way. You are essentially fed opiates and voluntarily starved of food and water until you meet your end. I don't see why this couldn't be shortened.