Guest Column: Dying with Dignity vs. “Death with Dignity”

In a recent episode of “60 Minutes,” interviewer Scott Pelley said to his guest, “You don’t have much time. Why are you spending time doing this?” His guest, former U.S. Senator Ben Sasse, who received a fatal diagnosis of pancreatic cancer in December, replied with a laugh, “You invited me, so I assume you needed to fill some time.”  

Short of a miracle, Sasse won’t see his 14-year-old son grow up. He won’t walk his daughters down the aisle. And yet, he is teaching the nation a stunning lesson on dying with dignity. Sasse warns against the allure and the limits of political power and proclaims what matters more. Committed to free markets, he warns against the illusion that “more consumption can make you happier.” He’s at the same time optimistic about what technologies can provide and concerned about what has happened to our sense of self and happiness, especially young people. 

Sasse is not being stoic, as though death is not a big deal. He mourns what the loss means to his family and regrets what he missed traveling for work instead of being at home. He regrets the pain that cancer has brought to him. But how he is dying is making a rare statement to the world, and it is being heard. As Dr. James Wood described in a recent World article: 

In a culture that kills to avoid hardship and hides death to avoid reckoning, a man dying well on high-profile platforms is a subtly radical act. He is, without quite saying so, making an argument for life—for its dignity, its giftedness, its meaning even at the last. 

His voice is especially powerful in a world that continues to accept various forms of euthanasia and doctor-assisted death. Across Europe, Canada, and a number of American states, advocates of what is often called “medical assistance in dying” or MAiD, market the promise of “death with dignity.” Unspoken in that terminology is the assumption that we need “death with dignity” because there is no such thing as “dying with dignity.” There is no value to be found in facing suffering or enduring pain to honor life until its God-given end. So many speak as if giving up on life takes courage and compassion.  

Within the godless and hopeless framework of a naturalistic worldview, life is, as Shakespeare put into the mouth of Macbeth, “a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” Why suffer to preserve such a meaningless existence when no higher purpose or value is available to be found? To die is to escape from such a life. Once pleasure or plenty is no longer available to us, there is no dignity to be found in how we die. 

The Christian view is centered on Christ’s death, which restored the dignity with which God created us. Because death is transformed, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote, there is dying with dignity. There is meaning and significance in the courage to face life’s end and the pain that so often accompanies it. In the Christian worldview, death in all its pain and suffering, is redeemable in the life of Christ, who defeated death. 

That sort of courage is undeniable when witnessed in real life. As President Clinton, after being soundly critiqued by Mother Theresa on the issue of abortion, put it, “It’s difficult to argue with a life so well lived.” In the same way, what we are hearing and witnessing in these final days of Ben Sasse, is that it is difficult to argue with one dying so well.  

Indeed, as a wise pastor once observed, our children will remember all sorts of things about us, but the way in which we die is what they will most remember about our faith. “Death with dignity” is a farce, a damnable idea that dehumanizes us individually and collectively. But dying with dignity, even as we pray for grace and peace for him and his family, is a profound gift that God is giving all of us right now through Ben Sasse.

Copyright 2026 by the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. Reprinted from BreakPoint.org with permission.

Family Council Joins Letter Urging Congressional Leaders Not to Fund Abortionists

Above: Planned Parenthood’s facility in Little Rock. Since 2022, the center no longer performs abortions, but it does refer women to abortion facilities in other states. Planned Parenthood’s affiliates nationwide have received hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding over the years. File Photo from 2020.

On Wednesday, Family Council joined more than 50 other pro-life leaders and organizations in a letter calling on Congress not to fund abortionists.

In 2025, Congress placed a moratorium on funding for abortionists, and since then many abortion facilities have closed because they no longer receive federal tax dollars.

But the moratorium is scheduled to expire in July. If Congress does not extend it, abortionists and their affiliates could be eligible for taxpayer funding once again.

The letter Family Council signed points this out, saying:

Planned Parenthood is a prime example of how the abortion industry fills its coffers through taxpayer dollars. According to their 2024-2025 annual report, Planned Parenthood alone received $832 million in taxpayer funding, primarily through federal health programs. Since the moratorium, at least twenty abortion facilities have closed, yet the current trend line is an increase in the number of abortions. Returning more than three-quarters of a billion dollars to an organization that just increased its year-over-year abortion numbers by 8%, and to other providers like it, will only further entrench the abortion industry in American society and politics and return the federal government to being the largest subsidizer of abortion providers. . . .

It is unconscionable that taxpayer funds be disbursed to an industry whose core business is terminating the life of unborn children.

July 4, 2026, marks a key moment in American history. We cannot in good conscience celebrate 250 years of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by simultaneously federally funding the largest abortion providers in the country in order to facilitate their deadly and destructive businesses.

We urgently request that the Senate and House take up a new reconciliation package to, at minimum, extend the moratorium.

Policymakers must protect taxpayers from subsidizing abortionists. Arkansas has spent years working to do exactly that.

In 1988, voters passed Amendment 68 to the Arkansas Constitution prohibiting public funds from paying for abortion except to save the mother’s life. Following a lawsuit by an abortion clinic in Little Rock, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Amendment 68 could be enforced to whatever extent it did not conflict with federal laws. Practically speaking, this has prevented public funding of abortion in most cases, with the exception of abortions paid for with Medicaid funds in certain circumstances permitted by the federal law.

However, Amendment 68 did not prevent abortionists from receiving state or federal funds for other purposes besides performing abortion.

That’s why in 2015, the Arkansas Legislature passed Act 996 prohibiting the state from awarding grants to abortion providers and their affiliates.

That same year, Governor Asa Hutchinson directed the Department of Human Services to terminate its Medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood after a series of undercover videos showed Planned Parenthood officials discussing the sale of organs and tissue harvested from aborted babies.

Following a lengthy lawsuit, Arkansas was able to block Medicaid funds from Planned Parenthood.

In 2021, the Arkansas Legislature passed a measure keeping abortionists like Planned Parenthood out of public schools after Family Council obtained nearly 1,400 pages of documents that revealed Planned Parenthood had worked in public schools in Pulaski County for several years.

Abortionists like Planned Parenthood have tried again and again to receive taxpayer funds. Arkansas has done a good job keeping them off the public dole. Our federal government needs to do the same. That’s why Family Council is pleased to join so many pro-life leaders in urging Congress to do exactly that.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.