Further to post below.
Sitting watching BBC 'Question Time' as the panel discuss the question: 'Should assisted suicide be legalised in the UK?'
Despite the majority of the panel being against - their reasoning was essentially pragmatic and lacking any strong conviction. Notably it was the one member of the panel who was strongly in favour (Sir Tom Hunter) who got the biggest round of applause from the audience. The current situation of assisted suicide being illegal in the UK doesn't look overly secure on this basis.
It seems to be another case of our society stumbling, without any firm reference points, into the further commodification of human life. Just as when the legalisation of abortion was argued for in the 1960s - we are assured that this would be a measure reserved for only the most desperate cases, it would have to meet rigorous medical criteria, and it would be scrupulously regulated. Of course, we now know, 40 years on, that abortion is carried out effectively 'on demand', with few questions asked and on a scale beyond anything its original proponents would have imagined. The lessons of such fundamental changes to how human life is viewed - is that once the door is opened 'all bets are off'.
The trickle of assisted suicides that legalisation would initially allow would almost inevitability become a flood over time. Once taking your life, at the point you perceive it to be lacking sufficient quality or that it's become an unfair burden on others, becomes common - the insidious pressure will be that those 'hanging on' in similar circumstances are being selfish. After all look how much freer, happier, wealthier Family X is now that granny is no longer 'tying them down'. Thus very subtly poor struggling incontinent grandad in Family Y is going to feel quite 'the parasite'. And if he rejects the now available option of ending his life - then why should his family or anyone else feel any responsibility to care for him? After all it's his choice if he wants to carry on living!
The problem with assisted suicide is that is involves the most vulnerable valuing their lives against the most powerful.
AUDIO TALKS (including SNAG)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Spot on, Andy. This should be a significant concern for all of us as we will be the ones living downstream in a culture where life has been not only devalued, but that devaluation has become fully accepted.
Yea, I saw the programme too. I heard politicians say they had spent a long time thinking about it but did not seem to be able to express any coherent arguments. No talk about the sanctity of life or our lives being in the hand of God. No answer to Alex Salmonds question - what happens if when I am feeling well I approve assisted dying, but change my mind when I am in the late stage of some degenerative desease? I agreed with the nurse who spoke about investing more in looking after the dying such as is currently provided by the hospice movement. Joni Ericson is an example of a Paraplegic who initially could not contemplate living, but who in fact went on to live the most amazing life.
I too saw the programme and was also struck by the parallels to the arguments for legalised abortion in the 1960's. Yes, having reached my threescore and ten, I'm old enough to remember those days. It comes back ultimately to the basis for human dignity as you rightly suggest, Andy. 19C christians fought for the dignity of man in their battle against slavery and we must make our voices heard in the public arena. It's worth reading again the "prophetic" 1979 book, "Whatever happened to the human race" by Francis Schaffer & Everett Koop. The Christian Medical Fellowship has good literature on euthanasia, genetic engineering, abortion etc.
This is a key current issue where the views of an increasing secular society are being pushed to the fore. But Christianity remains God's truth and the gospel entrusted to us to proclaim, the only complete solution to man's problems. It is still God's power unto salvation and provides that firm foundation for life and godliness.
What is becoming increasingly clear to me is that it is only religious people who can argue coherently against euthanasia.
Unfortunately, on mainstream media at least, almost none of the religious people (including evangelical Christians) tie their arguments clearly to the gospel.
In my experience of hearing and watching, they try to use all sorts of pragmatic arguments which ultimately fail, as in the 1960s abortion debate.
Short of some fairly major intervention of the Holy Spirit, legalised euthanasia is an inevitability in almost every EU country.
So Christians and non-Christians need to prepare for the post-euthanasia world. What are we going to teach, and how are we going to relate to a society that allows people to kill themselves (or, rather, be killed) under the label of a good death?
if there is no significance to our origins and no significance in our destination, i.e we come from nowhere and are just going to rot in the ground, then our life is just meaningless insignificance. That is the grinding conclusion of a secular/humanist worldview..so as Christians, we have so much more to exaplain and reveal...about life, death, living and judgement...these are the kinds of things we need to be engaging with...
Andy, Thanks for raising this issue. I too watched the programme and agree with your other contributors - we are in dangerous territory as a country. Of course, like so many other areas, if God is left out of the equation then anything is 'acceptable'. We must remember at all times that we are guided by the Word of God and not by the 'opinion of the day' however vocal or popular. Jim Hopewell
Hi. Stumbled upon your article. You're absolutely right in saying it's another case of our society stumbling, without any firm reference points. Keep on with your work of telling people about Jesus, as we will in our little town too. He is our only hope!
Mark Simpson
http://wellfieldchurch.blogspot.com
Excellent comments on life and it's eternal value. Thank you! Jennifer
Mark, I found your article very interesting on assisted suicide. It has been an issue here in the U.S. as well. It is knocking at our doors and we need to pray for our countries and their leaders, that they make Godly decisions concerning this. Like leagalized abortion, by opening it up the floodgate a little ways, we will have a flood in a very short time with many reasons condoning it exercise.
The elderly will fall prey to this because they have no voice in today's society. Do we honor them as we did 50 years ago? I remember reading a story of an elderly grandfather living in his son's home. He could not control his shaking and spilled his food on the table while eating, so he was asked to sit alone so that the son and his family would not have to see him spill his food. They eventually got disgusted with his eating habits and put him in the corner on the floor. The wife said to him, you can eat out of this trough since you like eating like a pig. The children looked in silence watching the whole drama unfolding. A couple of days later their little boy was found in his bedroom hammering away on his wooden toys. Happily, the father and mother asked him what he was making. The boy looked up and said with a smile, "I am making you and mom a trough when you come to live with me." The next day the grandfather was found eating at the dinner table with the family. He was talked to with respect and treated with care and kindness from that day on.
Are we headed this direction with our elderly? Do we so hold such little value that even a nursing home will not be tolerated? Not long ago, we invited the elderly into to our homes and treated them with respect and honor. What has happened to us as a society? Have we forgotten our faith. God says to honor you mother and father. We need to turn around in our faith and bring our grandparents to our homes and treat them with love and respect once again. August Thurmer from Winona, Minnesota. U.S.A.
I wonder where born again christians have been in history. Before 1920 a person going to a doctor was more likely to die of going to the doctor than doing without. Did they cry out then and say it was unjust? When Edward the VI was eutheninised twelve hours before he would have died to make sure The King's obituary got in The Times before other newspapers who reading this would have harangued the physician? Who here would have with-held penicilin from soldiers who contracted STDs in WW2? Churchill made the decision to let them have the cure. Would you disagree with him? If it comes to that 50,000,000 died in WW2 How many of those deaths would Born Again Christians like to postponed? How would they have done it? If the issue is about abortion is moral relativism, then the moral relativism starts at the point of conception, not the extinguishing of life. If men accounted for their sexual behaviour a lot better then fewer women would get unwanted pregnancies. The moral relativism is the historical patriarchy the makes the conceptions possible... the 20th century is an object lesson in the lack of self control.
The biggest weakness with the modern consensual euthenasia is how the rich can afford it more because of their wealth, and that is a problem with the distribution of money, not health care.
Dear Bearz - thanks for you post but I think you're getting the issues of medical interventions to save life mixed up with medical interventions to prematurely end life. The former is a great blessing which born-again Christians have helped pioneer (e.g. Fleming & penicillian who thus saved countless lives from STDs) As a born-again Christian I would have wanted to extend most of the 50m lives that WW2 prematurely ended. The issue isn't about refusing treatment that could extend life but the pressure being created to proactively terminate lives when they are deemed to be unprofitable or unrewardng.
Post a Comment