What kind of a [so-called] "Christian church" leadership would go way too far down the path-to-perdition by blatantly adopting an official doctrinal stand that is totally the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches about respect for human life (i.e. the sixth commandment, Thou Shalt Not Kill):
"The Church of England has broken with tradition dogma by calling for doctors to be allowed to let sick newborn babies die."
Shocking, isn't it! You can read the full story from the London Daily Mail online by clicking here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/ar...ge_id=1770
Speechless!
I think you may be stating this a little more simply than it is put in the article. It seemed to me that the bishop meant only to approve allowing to die the severely disabled, such as those nearly brain dead or those infants whose conditions cannot be reversed and will forever be unable to breathe or pump blood on their own. But maybe I read it wrong... it certainly is a sensationalized story meant to get attention rather than explain things correctly - so it's hard to know for sure.
As technology advances to provide doctors with the ability to prevent death in nearly every instance, the decision as to when to not do it becomes increasingly complicated.
The problem I have with churches coming out with statements like this is that they do not do an adequate job of shepherding their sheep. Not enough people attend church to learn how to be moral agents, and instead many go to obtain a clear conscience.
If pastors and leaders want to help their congregation make these difficult decisions, they should do so privately and pay attention to each circumstance as they compassionately help the families think and feel through what is the right thing to do.
As it is, this kind of statement will provide license to ethically blind people who will only see that the church says it is morally acceptable to 'let disabled babies die' and then apply 'disabled' to any child that isn't perfect.
And the Bishop of Southwark, Tom Butler, who is the vice chair of the Church of England's Mission and Public Affairs Council, has also argued that the high financial cost of keeping desperately ill babies alive should be a factor in life or death decisions.
"The principle of justice inevitably means that the potential cost of treatment itself, the longer term costs of health care and education and opportunity cost to the NHS in terms of saving other lives have to be considered."
I agree with 7 oclock, however did the good Bishop really need to mention financial implications twice?
The Bishop is also a member of the House Of Lords & is in a very powerful position.
Death is a part of life - sometimes medical science seems to want to refuse to want to admit this - and curative medicine is taken too far.
You only have to consider what Anglican Clergy are doing in the Armed Forces, blessing the troops etc to see they have never had a Biblical regard for Human Life.
In fact I think the Bible to them is just a Church prop else they wouldnt allow Women Priests or Practising Homosexuals.
Still, at least they dont burn people alive for reading the Bible.
They do have some lovely hymns though!
"You only have to consider what Anglican Clergy are doing in the Armed Forces, blessing the troops etc to see they have never had a Biblical regard for Human Life."
The British Armed Forces do a job, a necessary one.
"You only have to consider what Anglican Clergy are doing in the Armed Forces, blessing the troops etc to see they have never had a Biblical regard for Human Life."
The British Armed Forces do a job, a necessary one.
I know, I used to be in them, but never as a representitive of the Bible though.
Since when has that been the case? I have my religious beliefs but I don't let them interfere with business, I presume it's the same with the armed forces.
What kind of a [so-called] "Christian church" leadership would go way too far down the path-to-perdition by blatantly adopting an official doctrinal stand that is totally the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches about respect for human life (i.e. the sixth commandment, Thou Shalt Not Kill)
ever heard of the crusades, the knights templar werent exactly pacifists.
I think there are several sides to this. Someone already pointed out that death is part of life.Everyone dies, and I think that nowadays there's a tendancy to see death as a wrong to be fought or something avoidable, which is not realistic or healthy. I live in the US, and here, there is the matter of Pro-Life and Disability activists pressuring family members and doctors to keep very sick newborns, people with severe brain damage who will never regain conciosness, and people in simalar extreme conditions alive even if the family does not want that.I see passing laws about this or active interventions as a mistake, first because in the US dicsionions about medical care have always been left to the individual, and that's how it should be. I wouldn't want a government burocrat telling me that I must continue, or stop, medical treatment for myself or my child over my objections.Second,here in the US keeping someone alive in spite of the family's wishes raises the issue of the First Amendment right to freedom of religion being violated, since different religions disagree on when life ends,what is an acceptable way to extend life, et c. Just my take on this, sorry if I'm rambling.....
This is exactly what used to happen to babies with down syndrome, before there was a test for it. The parents would refuse to treat things like intestinal blockages because the child had down syndrome and somehow this gave them the right to decide that this person's life was not worth living, even though someone with down syndrome can live a full life. The phrase "severely disabled" is a cop-out.
"whose conditions cannot be reversed and will forever be unable to breathe or pump blood on their own"
Ever heard of a portable ventilator? And mechanical hearts are being developed, some kinds already exist. Would you really deny someone the chance at life just because they need one of these?
You should check out notdeadyet.org, maybe you'll get some perspective.
I don't know if Conlang was talking to me, but I'm answering anyway.I am familiar with Not Dead Yet, and they're a big reason why despite being disabled, and having had my life not valued because of that, I want nothing to do with Disability Activism.Since there seems to be no room for dissent on disability "pro-life" matters for any reason, they wouldn't want me anyway no matter what I could offer them. I find your reference to to what used to happen to down syndrome babies to be a cop-out.There are many ways that disabled people's lives are devalued,including disability payments that aren't enough to survive on,problems wth the health care system, disabled people becoming homeless for lack of accessable housing-I could go on and on. The "pro-life" people don't care.As I said,(Yes, I'm evil for seeing that this exists), there are issues here of civil liberties,and taking these away could do far more damage than retaining them even if they may be abused. There are matters that could be raised, like those I've mentioned, that could be used to show that disabled people are considered expendable without opening the civil liberty/constitution can of worms.That's not being done.I have a simalar veiw of other things-many ideas expressed in public are toxic, but limiting what can be said is worse.
Another thing-all human beings, and all other living things on this Earth, will die. Period. No exeptions. Only a question of now or later.Later is often preferable, but it's never guarenteed.This seems to be forgotten at times.
But I don't think it's right not to treat curable things such as intestinal blockages. Different if somebody is in a lot of pain and they are never going to get better.
There are many ways that disabled people's lives are devalued,including disability payments that aren't enough to survive on,problems wth the health care system, disabled people becoming homeless for lack of accessable housing-I could go on and on. The "pro-life" people don't care.As I said,(Yes, I'm evil for seeing that this exists),
I can't see why you think you are evil for seeing what does exist & as a disabled person, living where you do I can see exactly what you mean.
Some countries do have better facilities & money for the disabled, it is the hoops that a person has to go through to obtain them that is the problem in the UK.
Some conditions are treatable, some aren't.Some can improve quality of life, some can't.