People always ask me if I ever get shaken in my faith... even after being a Christian for so many years and being part of a many essential teams that run the church..
hah... I'd be a downright awful liar if I say no.
What do you think about death?
- a transition?
- an essential part of everything?
- a liberation?
well... what about a slow, painful, extremely costly death... a slow death where you are beyond the skills of doctors and medicine.
The National Council of Churches (NCCS), issued a statement not too long ago condemning the practice of euthanasia - essentially, the permittive act of causing another person who is hopelessly ill or suffering, the choice of death.
Their reasoning highlights 4 points
1) The Sanctity of Life
2) Respect for Human Life
3) The Ethos of Medical Practice and
4) Euthanasia's effect on society
For the full statement:
(http://www.methodist.org.sg/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=938)
My problem with the above reasoning are as follows.
1) The Sanctity of Life.
God gave us life, thus it is not in our hands to take it away. God made us good stewards of life (argument from my Dad in the debate I had a few days back). As such, we must treasure it and make sure that it is not taken away unless it is the will of God.
If we allow euthanasia, being passive or actively playing a role in it, we are taking away life, and not being a good steward of the li(ves) that God gave us.
Now. My question is this. Does retaining life make us a good steward of life?
True, it is not our power to take life away. But is it in our power to push life to a person? .
A person dying from a wasting disease, writhing in agony every second. Blood seeps from his eyes as he cries, his veins are purple and blue, his skin rotting away.
He cries out to you to "let him go", "let him die". To release him from this "diabolical life-sustaining machine" that is causing him to live another ten months before his body eventually collapses beyond the power of machines.
You say kindly, "I will do whatever it is in my power to let you live.", "I'll spend my whole family's saving, sell my house, my insurance, stocks and shares to let you live this ten months."
... "who knows, there might be a cure."
The person begs you not to waste resources and let him die.
In the natural context, the person would have died from that wasting disease already. But due to life extension systems, advance medicine and your undivided attention and resources, his life is prolonged indefinitely.
Are you playing God?
Does God give life? Yes.
Does God take life? Yes.
Who are you to extend another person's suffering, increase your family and loved one's suffering due to your wastage of resources, destroy another person's hope of using that life support for a curable disease?
2) Respect for Human Life
The Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue prohibits murder - which extends to suicide and the losing of personal life as well.
Euthanasia is not a treatment, it is not a cure. Euthanasia is a release.
It is the release of the suffering of another person, to die naturally. Would one person kill another to save the entire world?
That may be an exaggeration, but there has been so many instances in the bible where one person died to save the world - the Gospal being the prime example.
It may be heresy to say that Jesus "committed suicide" to save the world, but the fact is that He did give up his own life to save every one of us, from the very real eternal death that we would have faced!
What respect is there for a life that persists in consuming resources, enduring unending agony and claiming it all in the sanctity of his own life?
Selfish? - probably.
3) Ethos of Medical Practice
To minimize suffering and maximize care. Never to kill.
Which one is more important?
If both are important, which one takes precedence?
I care so much for the patient that I cause all the other patients around me to be unable to receive my full attention. I tried morphine, valium, cerebrex, whatever it takes to stop the pain, but verging on killing that patient, that patient is still in so much pain.
What would be ETHOS then?
Ethos is derived from Ethics. As a medical practitioner, you're to ease suffering, and do what it takes to save the rest.
If a plagued victim enters your hospital, incurable. Would you send him away?
He is suffering so badly. And the solution to the problem is just in pressing the power switch on the right of his bed.
What would you do?
You think not killing him will save the rest of your patients?
4) The effect of Euthanasia on Society
"Seeing death as the ultimate solution and not considering other alternatives."
Lets compare Euthanasia and Abortion, as so kindly equalized in the statement.
Euthanasia -
Alternative way out : Supreme Divine Intervention
Possible to affect people around you adversely : Yes
Taxing on resources : Yes
(It's tough. And no reward)
Abortion -
Alternative way out : Raise the frigging kid!!
Possible to affect people around you adversely : Yes. People will go smoochie smoochie what a cute baby.
Taxing on resources : Of course, but it is rewarding when your child finally grows to become a good person.
(It's really tough. But the reward is immensively high)
But lets look at the "alternative way out". Rejecting Euthanasia, the person eventually dies. Rejecting abortion, the person eventually lives.
Is it a proper comparison? - My suggestion is "no."
Euthanasia does not advocate "DEATH" as a solution to "SOCIAL ILLS". Euthanasia is the solution for "MEDICAL INCAPACITY AND ABJECT SUFFERING."
social ills is such a broad term that can be used to classify things like robbery, murder, to even breaking up with your boyfriend.
Why on earth are you all trying to downplay the severity of euthanasia?
....
I agree with the suggestion that more Hospices should be set up, more caregivers and medical-relief technology should be looked into. But I still believe that prolonging suffering is not our duty.
As stewards of money, we give as needed, we take as needed.
Not giving, for the sake of selfishness, makes us a bad steward.
Giving, for the sake of fame and adoration, makes us a bad steward.
As good stewards of life, we give as needed, we take as needed.
Witholding for the sake of selfishness makes a bad steward
Giving for the sake of fame and adoration, makes us a bad steward.
Who are you to judge who is allowed to live or die?
If you truly have the guts, then let the person be off medically!
Use divine intervention and divine powers to heal! No medicine!
What is my stand then?
My stand is, "If a person has no cure, beyond the reach of the instruments of this world, is suffering immensively, taxing on resources, AND HE REQUESTS TO DIE. - then let it be." - and by 'let it be' i mean, let it go naturally.
Off the life support and heaps of drugs, and let God-breathed life take its final course.
If God willed it, then he shall live by the grace of God.
NOT BY THE POWER OF HUMAN MEDICINE or MACHINES.
That is, by the way, passive euthanasia.
I do not advocate any other form of euthanasia. And since my example is extremely specific, obviously it doesn't cover suicide either.
Think again before you take the bible out of context.
Don't make yourself be a laughing stock for nothing.
...
No comments:
Post a Comment