Posted by
The Interface on Friday, July 11, 2008 12:25:39 AM
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.” (Isaiah 14:12-14)
This passage with all its “I will” statements is usually assigned to Satan himself in his rebellion against his sovereign Lord and Creator. The declaration expresses an extreme pride and ultimate arrogance, forming an unbounded hubris that proclaims a created being will be like God.
This is precisely what man does when he thinks he can make judgments on the so-called “quality of life” of other individuals. Ultimately, to make such judgments even about one’s own life is a proclamation of one’s own godhood and a denial of the wisdom and sovereignty of the true and living God. The slippery grounds of the bioethics arena are slippery precisely because man thinks he has the wisdom and knowledge of God and thus the ability to make decisions for himself and others that are, in fact, not within his jurisdiction at all.
I am sick of euthanasia advocates whining about people’s “quality of life” as a justification for murder, to give “assisted suicide” its true name. I am sick of the arrogance that decides to starve and dehydrate someone who is inconvenient to maintain physically (usually related to monetary expense) all because they think/believe/conclude this loved one has no “quality of life” and on that basis should be terminated. “Oh, it’s the only humane and dignified thing to do!” Really? How would you know, since your decision is based on your emotions and peer-pressure rather than objective principles rooted in reality and God’s Word?
Let’s examine this for a moment with this hypothetical thought experiment:
The grandmother is an alcoholic and the father spends his evenings out drinking in the taverns. His mother has tuberculosis. She has already given birth to four children. The first child is blind, the second child died, the third child is deaf, and the fourth child has tuberculosis. Now the mother is pregnant again. Given the extreme situation and the “obvious low quality of life” the fifth child is sure to experience, would you recommend an abortion?
Think carefully and make your choice before reading on.
Now my apologies: I deliberately mislabeled this as an hypothetical to make a point. The above situation is actually historical, and if you chose to murder the unborn child by abortion, you “terminated” Ludwig von Beethoven and robbed mankind of some of the most glorious music ever to be written!
A large part of the problem is our cultural delusion that we have a right, not just to life, but to the “good” life, as usually defined by an absence of any pain and problems, lots of money, and the ability to do anything we want at any time we want with anyone we want…and woe betide anyone who or anything that gets in our way! With this attitude of entitlement so ingrained into our cultural fiber, it is little wonder that those who are, indeed, suffering, would themselves seek to escape the pain by playing god with their lives.
I do not mean to make light of, or trivialize, the sufferings that some do go through, and I understand (yes, from experience) how painful it can be to watch a loved one suffer. It still does not justify the arrogant assumptions of those who will narcissistically choose what is convenient for them at the expense of others, or who encourage others to do likewise. It does not justify playing god with your life or that of another. It still goes back to pride. Our prideful sin nature rebels against the reality that we are not in control, and the sense of helplessness when reality sends us something painful compels those driven by feelings and narcissism rather than conviction and principle to conclude that the ends justify the means and to take any step necessary to relieve what is ultimately their own pain.
The Christian worldview does include a unique tension between seeking to alleviate pain and suffering (cf., e.g., Isaiah 58:6-10), and learning to live in spite of pain and suffering, deriving benefit and developing character from such, a concept anathema to the modern mind.
And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; And patience, experience; and experience, hope: And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us. (Romans 5:3-5)
And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. (2 Corinthians 12:7-10)
My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers [various] temptations [trials]; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing. (James 1:2-4)
(As a sidebar, the liberal inability to grasp that character comes from going through trials rather than having Big Brother help you avoid them is one reason such people do not see the difference in character between McCain and Obama. McCain has been through a far greater fire, and regardless of what we think of his policies, it has given him a depth of character that runs to far greater levels that the shallow dross seen in his democratic opponent.)
Those who cannot see the potential gain in going through suffering eventually loose hope, and their hopelessness yields tragic results. A recent example of such is reported here:
Whilst a woman in the UK with MS seeks the right to have her husband take her to Switzerland for assisted suicide to the cheers of euthanasia advocates and the media, other MS patients have been effectively treated with their own bone marrow stem cells.
Hopelessness is really frustrated pride, and in this case leads to individuals seeking to play god with their own lives when a solution is at hand. The press release has some very encouraging statistics regarding the treatment (with adult stem cells, I might add, not embryonic):
“All patients appeared to respond to treatment”, reported Dr. Ionova. Improvement was seen in 62.3%, and stabilisation occurred in 37.7% of patients. Progression after improvement occurred in 7.1% and progression after stabilisation in 11.8% of patients.
There were no deaths during the course of the study.
Out of 26 patients included in the quality-of-life analysis, 24 exhibited a response and preserved a good quality of life during the follow-up. No unexpected treatment-related adverse events were observed.
According to Dr. Ionova, immunosuppressive therapy plus autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation appears to be a safe and effective therapy for multiple sclerosis, Dr. Ionova concluded.
These results are not unique; they have been accumulating for some time now. The treatment isn’t easy, but it works…on one condition. You have to be alive to receive it.
UPDATE: Lest you think the above is just much ado about nothing, read this very
recent news story out of Florida. The title and subheading tell it all:
Foster child denied shot at new liver: A Central Florida foster child needs a life-saving liver, but doctors have taken him off a transplant list because they fear he cannot recover from surgery without a stable home.
Translation: We'd rather this kid die because his quality of life makes it unlikely he will accept the transplant. Besides, he's already disabled and we'd rather give the liver to someone more "worthy" of it who's not disabled and more fully capable of contributing to society (and our wallets).
Oops! Did we say that out loud?!?