Posted on 05/04/2018 5:37:38 PM PDT by marshmallow
Chesterton saw it coming. Official control means the loss of parental control. It’s gone from the classroom to the hospital room.
A cynic would say, “Don’t go into hospital. It’s not safe. Consider how many people die there.” But even the hardened cynic would be shocked at the hospital that insists on a patient dying rather than releasing him to be treated at a different hospital. Even a cynic would be a little put off by a hospital that would not even diagnose a patient but conclude that death would be in his best interests.
What would G.K. Chesterton have thought about the tragic death of Alfie Evans at the end of April? What would he have thought about a hospital systematically preventing parents from taking their own child to another hospital to try to save his life? What would he have thought the government in his own native England stepping in and siding with the hospital against the parents? Of the highest law courts in the land rejecting the appeals of the parents in what the judges actually called “the best interests” of Little Alfie, which was no more than a death sentence?
The answer is, Chesterton saw it coming.
He predicted that with the rise of bureaucratic health care, “health” would be given preference over life. He warned that the mere pursuit of health would lead to something unhealthy. He warned that official science would become more official and less scientific. He predicted that we would be subject to a tyranny of health care officials who answer to no one. He also saw the precedence of judicial murder. And he foresaw the current intolerance of faith in general and Catholic faith in particular.
As Catholics, we are still celebrating Easter, as well we should, but that means that Good......
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicworldreport.com ...
Stephen Hawking lived over 5 decades of his life incapacitated.
Unable to live, or even move, without the aid of humans and machines.
He cursed God every day of his life, yet I didn't know of a single Christian who said he should be starved to death because his "quality of life" was insufficient.
I've confronted the eugenicists with this question, and not a single one has given me a satisfactory answer.
What exactly, is your question?
“Why didn’t someone ever suggest that Stephen Hawking be denied food and water, thus allowing him to die vs live in such a handicapped state?”
If that is your question, I suppose the easy answer is that unless Stephen himself brought up such an option, perhaps no one wanted to broach the topic. No one wished to be the bringer of such a negative, bleak concept. We have no proof that this was not brought up for discussion, by a Christian or agnostic, however inadvertently.
Chesterton saw it coming.
You can’t be “murdered” by a machine. A machine can f*ck you up but it wouldn’t be murder. More like you f*cked up and because you happened to be in the way of a machine that happened to be in operation, you sustained a fatal injury or injuries that lead to your death.
Chesterton was a great inspiration to C. S. Lewis.
The “machine” is the utilitarian mindset of unaccountable bureaucrats.
It takes a bit of time to get used to his style, but so far so good.
My first highlighted passage: "The fact is this: that the modern world, with its modern movements, is living on its Catholic capital. It is using, and using up, the truths that remain to it out of the old treasury of Christendom."
Same difference.
When your society becomes a killer is it wrong for armed gangs to form in order to handle business and rescue victims. Make it into the old West and after some know-it-all authorities die, things will get polite again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.