Despite the fact that I was not enarmoured of Steve Irwin, the crocodile hunter, I do have to acknowledge his tragic death at the age of 44. In fact it was with a shock on Monday that I first read the news on the Internet that the man known as the Crocodile Hunter, who made Australians sound so ridiculous with his "crikey", was dead as a result of the barb of a sting-ray entering his heart. He did not stand a chance in the attack because the toxin of the barb is deadly.
Today, I learned, also via the Internet, the shocking news that my favourite racing car driver, Peter Brock, also known as Peter Perfect, was dead, as a result of a car crash in a rally in West Australia. Who would think that the man who believed in preaching the gospel of safe car driving would die in a car accident. It looks like he swept the bend too wide and the car went out of control on a slippery surface.
These two popular figures in Australia made an impact with people in all walks of life. Peter Brock tried to bring happiness to children, and Steve Irwin did the same. Each man made an impact in his own chosen field. They were dedicated fathers to their children, and that is just so apparent in the way that Steve Irwin was pictured with his children and wife. He showed no fear towards the animals that he cared about in his Australian zoo. He was passionate about caring for the environment and especially the animals. His legacy will live on.
Peter Brock's legacy is different because he was a racing car champion, having won the Bathurst 500 (miles) and 1000 (kms) 9 times, as well as winning other driving championships. He used the number on his car to drive home the message about .05 as the blood alcohol level. He was always very safety conscious and that is what makes his death, as the result of a car accident all the more shocking.
I am not even into motor sports, but when it comes to Peter Brock, well I used to watch in fascination, and hope that he would be the winner. Now I have learned more about the man, and how he always signed autographs for his fans, even when all other drivers had disappeared from the track. I have learned about how he encouraged our Olympic team in Athens, and about some of the larrikin things that took place in Athens (via Laurie Lawrence). I have learned so much more about this man who dedicated his life to bringing home the message on how to drive safely. Yet, his seat belt and safety helmet could not save his life.
It has been a very sad end to a week that started out in a sad way. My God keep both of these men safe in His arms, and may their families be consoled in their grief.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Monday, September 04, 2006
The "Azzam" Threat: A prelude to Future Jihad in America
Counterterrorism Blog: The "Azzam" Threat: A prelude to Future Jihad in America
There has been a new twist in the fight against Jihad in America. Al Qaeda have introduced the Tokyo Rose of Jihad. His name is Adam Gadahn and he has made a vide in which he has issued the obligatory request for Americans to convert to Islam. This is a very serious threat and it cannot be underestimated as far as the wide ranging implications of this latest development.
Forget all the mushroom fodder about American and British foreign policy. That is only a pretext for furthering the Jihad movement without raising suspicion from the moonbats on the left wing side of politics, who are falling all over themselves in their own fight against the American President.
Walid Phares from the Counter-Terrorism blog has noted the following:
1. The hand behind the message: The message is indeed "American". The message is directed to the American and Canadian people at the hands of a traitor American.
2. Who is it destined to? It is basically addressed to those who will carry a "jihad in America", possibly asserting Adam Gahdan as their leader. This move has pierced the linguistic shield of America's media and reach US citizens directly, as a way to spread confusion amongst those who do not understand the real meaning of JIHAD.
3. The ideological platform: Al Qaeda's movement is world wide and in the United States is seeking total annihilation or conversion of the enemy: American and other democracies.
4. Argumentation tactics: the speech writer is appealing to all who hate Bush and Blair.
5. The enemies of Jihad: the speech writer names a number of intellecutal enemies including Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer. He praises the Dhimmi and brainless George Galloway.
There are some more troubling aspects to the message in relation to the claim that there are jihadists at work in the armed services. However, what is more typical in the message is that the west is to either convert to this facist Islam or face the fire.
There are journalists who remain steadfast enemies of western civilization. They are fools because they cannot see what they are doing in their zeal for the Islamic cause. They are dangerous and they are traitors to all of our western countries.
Islamic facism remains a culture of death. They care nothing for the lives of others which is the antitheis of the love of life that comes from being one with God who is LOVE and Mercy.
There has been a new twist in the fight against Jihad in America. Al Qaeda have introduced the Tokyo Rose of Jihad. His name is Adam Gadahn and he has made a vide in which he has issued the obligatory request for Americans to convert to Islam. This is a very serious threat and it cannot be underestimated as far as the wide ranging implications of this latest development.
Forget all the mushroom fodder about American and British foreign policy. That is only a pretext for furthering the Jihad movement without raising suspicion from the moonbats on the left wing side of politics, who are falling all over themselves in their own fight against the American President.
Walid Phares from the Counter-Terrorism blog has noted the following:
1. The hand behind the message: The message is indeed "American". The message is directed to the American and Canadian people at the hands of a traitor American.
2. Who is it destined to? It is basically addressed to those who will carry a "jihad in America", possibly asserting Adam Gahdan as their leader. This move has pierced the linguistic shield of America's media and reach US citizens directly, as a way to spread confusion amongst those who do not understand the real meaning of JIHAD.
3. The ideological platform: Al Qaeda's movement is world wide and in the United States is seeking total annihilation or conversion of the enemy: American and other democracies.
4. Argumentation tactics: the speech writer is appealing to all who hate Bush and Blair.
5. The enemies of Jihad: the speech writer names a number of intellecutal enemies including Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer. He praises the Dhimmi and brainless George Galloway.
There are some more troubling aspects to the message in relation to the claim that there are jihadists at work in the armed services. However, what is more typical in the message is that the west is to either convert to this facist Islam or face the fire.
There are journalists who remain steadfast enemies of western civilization. They are fools because they cannot see what they are doing in their zeal for the Islamic cause. They are dangerous and they are traitors to all of our western countries.
Islamic facism remains a culture of death. They care nothing for the lives of others which is the antitheis of the love of life that comes from being one with God who is LOVE and Mercy.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Age-old objections must not be allowed to delay this revolution - Opinion
Age-old objections must not be allowed to delay this revolution - Opinion
Bob Carr offers his somewhat erroneous opinions about why cloning and stem cell research should go ahead. It would seem that Mr. Carr is very much caught up with the bruaha that the use of embryonic stem cells for cloning and research is going to be the future panacea for all forms of illnesses.
However, Mr. Carr is very wrong in his opinions. What he does not seem to understand is that the future for research lies not with embryonic stems cells but with adult stem cell research. At the present time the embryonic stem cell research has not shown any form of promise. On the other hand, there is a problem with the growth of tumors in cells that have been developed in this way. The adult stem cell research, and the use of umbilical cord blood has been much more successful, and the future is with these forms of research.
We have no guarantee that scientists will be able to produce the cures for all sorts of disease. Sometimes we need to rely not upon science but upon God. Scientists tend to rely too much upon their own resources and they tend to negate the Creator. Embryonic stem cell research also negates the Creator.
Bob Carr offers his somewhat erroneous opinions about why cloning and stem cell research should go ahead. It would seem that Mr. Carr is very much caught up with the bruaha that the use of embryonic stem cells for cloning and research is going to be the future panacea for all forms of illnesses.
However, Mr. Carr is very wrong in his opinions. What he does not seem to understand is that the future for research lies not with embryonic stems cells but with adult stem cell research. At the present time the embryonic stem cell research has not shown any form of promise. On the other hand, there is a problem with the growth of tumors in cells that have been developed in this way. The adult stem cell research, and the use of umbilical cord blood has been much more successful, and the future is with these forms of research.
We have no guarantee that scientists will be able to produce the cures for all sorts of disease. Sometimes we need to rely not upon science but upon God. Scientists tend to rely too much upon their own resources and they tend to negate the Creator. Embryonic stem cell research also negates the Creator.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
BBC NEWS | Health | Harvard starts human cloning work
BBC NEWS Health Harvard starts human cloning work
In an attempt to force the issue of funding for stem cell research, Professor Lawrence Summers of Harvard University has decided to step out and begin human cloning work.
Professor Summers was associated with the disgraced Hwang from South Korea. However, Professor Summers is undeterred by the publicity over the fact that Hwang had faked his results. Instead he has decided to trot out the following statement:
In an attempt to force the issue of funding for stem cell research, Professor Lawrence Summers of Harvard University has decided to step out and begin human cloning work.
Professor Summers was associated with the disgraced Hwang from South Korea. However, Professor Summers is undeterred by the publicity over the fact that Hwang had faked his results. Instead he has decided to trot out the following statement:
"While we understand and respect the sincerely held beliefs of those who
oppose this research, we are equally sincere in our belief that the
life-and-death medical needs of countless suffering children and adults
justifies moving forward with this research."
It is the good old nutshell hard sell for Professor Summers, that the research will lead to a cure for such illnesses as diabetes, Alzheimers, Parkinson's Disease (and the list grows). Unfortunately, to date there has been nothing substantial to emerge from the research that has been completed to date. Rather, what has occurred is that the results have shown that the use of embryonic stem cells rather than the stem cells that come from the placenta cause tumors.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah and the culture of death
Once again Israel has decided that enough is enough, and that it is time to tell Hezbollah that they do not rule Lebanon. The crisis began when Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers, whilst the Hamas also kidnapped an Israeli soldier on the Gaza strip. These actions have in turn been fuelled by the call to arms by none other than one of the most wicked men in the Middle East – the elected leader of Iran. It should be no surprise to learn that the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers had followed a war conference in the Middle East where Iran was encouraging other Arab nations to go to war and remove Israel from the map.
Will the left wing in politics continue to keep their heads in the sand and will they continue to blame Israel for everything? Without a doubt most of us feel total disbelief as we heard about the bombing of the Beirut airport. We feel the pain of the families for the victims who have died in Lebanon. What I do not understand is why the press has not bothered to mention that Hezbollah not only hit the Israeli warship, but that they also sank an Egyptian boat at the same time. Has there been yet another cover up within the MSM?
No matter what our politics, we have to look at this situation from the point of view of Life and Death. Too many young lives are being lost because of the crisis in the Middle East. Too many lives have been lost in Iraq, and now Lebanon is under attack once again. Yes, Lebanon is under attack, but this did not need to happen. If the Lebanese government had not been sympathizing with Hezbollah, and had the government of Lebanon been strong enough to round up the Hezbollah terrorists, instead of turning a blind eye to those activities, then perhaps Israel might not have needed to use strong arm tactics. At least that is what I would like to believe.
However, there is another reality to analyse in this situation. Where did Hezbollah get the rockets and missiles that have been launched against Israel? The backers of both the Hezbollah and Hamas are of course, Syria and Iran. Yes, Iran. The finger is pointing directly at Iran. The madman who is currently the leader in Iran has been breathing fire against Israel. He has openly made threats against the state of Israel, and he continues to state that he wants to see Israel wiped off the map. It is only logical that under such threats that Israel would choose to use military might to bring Hezbollah under control.
The constant cry for war is wearisome to say the least. How can these people say that they are doing the will of God when all they do is kill people? The Hamas and Hezbollah are well entrenched members of the culture of death.
Sunday, May 07, 2006
Part of me died when I saw this cruel killing - Sunday Times - Times Online
Part of me died when I saw this cruel killing - Sunday Times - Times Online
When I saw this article, I feel so much hurt and I want to cry for the sake of the family. However, this reporter's life and death is not in vain. She is the true martyr, and not those who blew up the Golden Mosque, or who have blown themselves up in the belief that they gain glory and eternal life. For these people there can only be eternal damnation, for those who killed this journalist are the wicked who are so aptly described in the Scriptures.
The story of the torture and death of Atwar Bahjat is probably one of the most sickening of stories that has ever been released. It is a story that was captured on a mobile telephone that was held by her captors. The battle fatigues of her tormentors were meant to implicate the Iraqi National Guard, and there has been a story that the Shi'ite Badr Brigade were responsible for her death. However, the nature of the torture and the manner in which her head was chopped off links her death to the orders of Zarqawi.
I am blogging this story here because I want my readers to read about the brutality of Al Qaeda, and how they are killing Muslims, including women. This Muslim woman was a very devout Muslim. She was half Sunni and half Shi'ite. When she was kidnapped and tortured, she had appealed to the crowd that surrounded her crew, but no one present would help when the truck containing two men pulled up and took Atwar away.
Atwar's death, as it was recorded on the cell phone, was very slow. She was seen to be stripped semi naked with blood trickling down her body. A man, who was the butcher, took a knife and he slowly slit her throat. Then, he stood aside as another man stamped on Atwar's stomach to make sure that the blood spurted forth. The butcher then finished the job of cutting off Atwar's head and placing it on top of her trunk. This form of murder is the hallmark of the butchers of Al Qaeda. They used the uniforms of the National Guard to disguise who they really were, and then they attempted to set up the Badr Band to make it look as though they had participated in her murder.
If the details of this woman's death is not enough, the writer in this Times story also details how Atwar's body had been bored by a drill. Her arms and legs had the holes of a drill and yes it is hard to imagine the torture that she endured before she was martyred.
This brave journalist was friendly with the Badr band, and I doubt that they would have been responsible for her kidnap and martyrdom. She reported the events in Iraq in a fair manner and she had been living with the threats on her life for some time before these monsters finally rounded her up and then tortured and murdered her for telling the truth about what was really happening in Iraq.
What really stands out here is that the people who were with Atwar as she attempted to report on the blowing up of the Golden Mosque were not prepared to help this woman escape from the men who had come to kill her. Was someone in that group complicit by informing of her presence in the area?
The level of the brutality against this innocent woman, and then the attempt to murder her family as they attended her funeral indicates that the forces behind this martyrdom belong to the culture of death.
In the long run we should be praising the work of this brave Muslim woman who was humiliated by her torturers as they stripped her naked and did indescribable deeds against her body. Her humiliation though, is akin to the humiliation that was endured by Jesus, and even though she is a Muslim, this devout woman will find herself being rewarded in Heaven. What she went through prior to her most disguting and painful death was sufficient for her to have gained Eternal Life. She gave her life for the sake of her country, and for this Atwar will be remembered and honoured.
When I saw this article, I feel so much hurt and I want to cry for the sake of the family. However, this reporter's life and death is not in vain. She is the true martyr, and not those who blew up the Golden Mosque, or who have blown themselves up in the belief that they gain glory and eternal life. For these people there can only be eternal damnation, for those who killed this journalist are the wicked who are so aptly described in the Scriptures.
The story of the torture and death of Atwar Bahjat is probably one of the most sickening of stories that has ever been released. It is a story that was captured on a mobile telephone that was held by her captors. The battle fatigues of her tormentors were meant to implicate the Iraqi National Guard, and there has been a story that the Shi'ite Badr Brigade were responsible for her death. However, the nature of the torture and the manner in which her head was chopped off links her death to the orders of Zarqawi.
I am blogging this story here because I want my readers to read about the brutality of Al Qaeda, and how they are killing Muslims, including women. This Muslim woman was a very devout Muslim. She was half Sunni and half Shi'ite. When she was kidnapped and tortured, she had appealed to the crowd that surrounded her crew, but no one present would help when the truck containing two men pulled up and took Atwar away.
Atwar's death, as it was recorded on the cell phone, was very slow. She was seen to be stripped semi naked with blood trickling down her body. A man, who was the butcher, took a knife and he slowly slit her throat. Then, he stood aside as another man stamped on Atwar's stomach to make sure that the blood spurted forth. The butcher then finished the job of cutting off Atwar's head and placing it on top of her trunk. This form of murder is the hallmark of the butchers of Al Qaeda. They used the uniforms of the National Guard to disguise who they really were, and then they attempted to set up the Badr Band to make it look as though they had participated in her murder.
If the details of this woman's death is not enough, the writer in this Times story also details how Atwar's body had been bored by a drill. Her arms and legs had the holes of a drill and yes it is hard to imagine the torture that she endured before she was martyred.
This brave journalist was friendly with the Badr band, and I doubt that they would have been responsible for her kidnap and martyrdom. She reported the events in Iraq in a fair manner and she had been living with the threats on her life for some time before these monsters finally rounded her up and then tortured and murdered her for telling the truth about what was really happening in Iraq.
What really stands out here is that the people who were with Atwar as she attempted to report on the blowing up of the Golden Mosque were not prepared to help this woman escape from the men who had come to kill her. Was someone in that group complicit by informing of her presence in the area?
The level of the brutality against this innocent woman, and then the attempt to murder her family as they attended her funeral indicates that the forces behind this martyrdom belong to the culture of death.
In the long run we should be praising the work of this brave Muslim woman who was humiliated by her torturers as they stripped her naked and did indescribable deeds against her body. Her humiliation though, is akin to the humiliation that was endured by Jesus, and even though she is a Muslim, this devout woman will find herself being rewarded in Heaven. What she went through prior to her most disguting and painful death was sufficient for her to have gained Eternal Life. She gave her life for the sake of her country, and for this Atwar will be remembered and honoured.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Public Outcry saves two under a death sentence in Texas
There are two patients in Texas hospitals who had been placed under a death sentence due to the law that was signed by George W. Bush in 1999. Both patients are alive today because of the public outcry against the death sentence that was pronounced by the ethics committees of their respective hospitals.
Andrea Clark's health is improving since she was transferred to the care of a new doctor. Yenlang Vo, who is a patient at St. David's North Austin Medical Centre has been given an additional 30 days to locate another facility for treatment. Both patients were designated for death via the removal of life sustaining equipment under a law that allows an ethics committee to determine whether or not a patient will live or die.
According to Jerry Ward, the new attending physician would not have known about her case if it had not been for the public outcry and the newspaper publicity.
What is happening in Texas is simply not good enough. The ethics committees in these hospitals are abusing the legislation that was put in place. They are using it to sentence people to death in what appears to be something that is based up pecuniary interests.
For the moment both women remain alive, and hopefully for one of them, Andrea Clark, there is the possibility that her improving health will see her coming off the life support equipment because she is able to breathe etc on her own, and not because of an ethics committee that uses the false criteria of quality of life.
Andrea Clark's health is improving since she was transferred to the care of a new doctor. Yenlang Vo, who is a patient at St. David's North Austin Medical Centre has been given an additional 30 days to locate another facility for treatment. Both patients were designated for death via the removal of life sustaining equipment under a law that allows an ethics committee to determine whether or not a patient will live or die.
According to Jerry Ward, the new attending physician would not have known about her case if it had not been for the public outcry and the newspaper publicity.
What is happening in Texas is simply not good enough. The ethics committees in these hospitals are abusing the legislation that was put in place. They are using it to sentence people to death in what appears to be something that is based up pecuniary interests.
For the moment both women remain alive, and hopefully for one of them, Andrea Clark, there is the possibility that her improving health will see her coming off the life support equipment because she is able to breathe etc on her own, and not because of an ethics committee that uses the false criteria of quality of life.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Prosecution of Midwife Casts Light on Home Births - New York Times
Prosecution of Midwife Casts Light on Home Births - New York Times
The profession of midwife has existed for a very long time. The debate these days is about whether a mother should deliver her baby at home with a mid-wife or whether the birth should take place in a hospital. There are risks involved if there is a home birth, but there are equal risks from having a hospital birth.
In some states within the USA, giving birth at home in the presence of a midwife who does not have medical training is illegal. I believe that this is fair enough. The midwives do a good service but if they are untrained with regard to medical skills then there is a higher than average risk of something going wrong. The women who have given birth at home would disagree with me on that issue.
The story that is highlighted here is a home birth death. The midwife was very professional and yes she did everything that is right, but she is practising without a licence. It is something that needs to be rectified in the state of Indiana. There are a lot of good reasons for making sure that the midwives are licensed, and the major one is ensuring that there is always professional conduct involved.
The battle between nurses and doctors on the one hand and midwives on the other, is being characterised as one that is due to money. However, I wonder whether that is totally true, given the risks involved in giving birth. An uncomplicated pregnancy and delivery can be handled at home. However, would a midwife practitioner be willing to call in a doctor if there are complications beyond her skills? What if the cord is wrapped around the baby's neck? What if there is some other medical emergency?
Having licensed mid-wife practioners is a far better scenario than having a situation where the mid-wife in attendance is afraid of sending the mother and baby to hospital out of fear of being arrested for illegal practice of midwifery. It would bring the profession out into the open and make the midwives more accountable for their practices.
Is there professional jealousy that has prevented the mid-wives from practising in these states? I doubt that professional jealousy and a motive for earnings are true reasons for the current situation. I think that it might be a case of looking into the historical background as to why it was necessary to enact these laws in the first place. The standards of practise need to be very high to ensure the safety of both mother and child.
The profession of midwife has existed for a very long time. The debate these days is about whether a mother should deliver her baby at home with a mid-wife or whether the birth should take place in a hospital. There are risks involved if there is a home birth, but there are equal risks from having a hospital birth.
In some states within the USA, giving birth at home in the presence of a midwife who does not have medical training is illegal. I believe that this is fair enough. The midwives do a good service but if they are untrained with regard to medical skills then there is a higher than average risk of something going wrong. The women who have given birth at home would disagree with me on that issue.
The story that is highlighted here is a home birth death. The midwife was very professional and yes she did everything that is right, but she is practising without a licence. It is something that needs to be rectified in the state of Indiana. There are a lot of good reasons for making sure that the midwives are licensed, and the major one is ensuring that there is always professional conduct involved.
The battle between nurses and doctors on the one hand and midwives on the other, is being characterised as one that is due to money. However, I wonder whether that is totally true, given the risks involved in giving birth. An uncomplicated pregnancy and delivery can be handled at home. However, would a midwife practitioner be willing to call in a doctor if there are complications beyond her skills? What if the cord is wrapped around the baby's neck? What if there is some other medical emergency?
Having licensed mid-wife practioners is a far better scenario than having a situation where the mid-wife in attendance is afraid of sending the mother and baby to hospital out of fear of being arrested for illegal practice of midwifery. It would bring the profession out into the open and make the midwives more accountable for their practices.
Is there professional jealousy that has prevented the mid-wives from practising in these states? I doubt that professional jealousy and a motive for earnings are true reasons for the current situation. I think that it might be a case of looking into the historical background as to why it was necessary to enact these laws in the first place. The standards of practise need to be very high to ensure the safety of both mother and child.
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Iraq Files Genocide Charges Against Saddam - Yahoo! News
Iraq Files Genocide Charges Against Saddam - Yahoo! News
In a move that will be repeated in the near future, Iraq has filed new charges of genocide against Saddam Hussein. The charges relate to Hussein's crackdown against the Kurds that killed an estimated 100,000 Kurds, over and above those who were killed via chemical warfare.
The prosecutors allege that Saddam Hussein sought to exterminate the Kurds with his actions against them during the 1980s. The charges relate to Operation Anfal where the clear intention was to get rid of the Kurds out of the northern regions of Iraq.
The move to indict Saddam Hussein for attempted genocide might be considered controversial by some, but I believe that most will see this as a move in the right direction as the growing body of evidence of the brutalities of this former dictator are exposed to the light.
Saddam Hussein was an extremely brutal dictator and he killed anybody who got in his way, including the members of the parliament that he killed as a result of the coup that got him into the powerful position of leader. He is also responsible for the attempted genocide of the Shia and others in Iraq. I see no reason why he should not stand trial on all of these charges and that he should be convicted of the attempted genocide of whole populations of Iraq.
In a move that will be repeated in the near future, Iraq has filed new charges of genocide against Saddam Hussein. The charges relate to Hussein's crackdown against the Kurds that killed an estimated 100,000 Kurds, over and above those who were killed via chemical warfare.
The prosecutors allege that Saddam Hussein sought to exterminate the Kurds with his actions against them during the 1980s. The charges relate to Operation Anfal where the clear intention was to get rid of the Kurds out of the northern regions of Iraq.
The move to indict Saddam Hussein for attempted genocide might be considered controversial by some, but I believe that most will see this as a move in the right direction as the growing body of evidence of the brutalities of this former dictator are exposed to the light.
Saddam Hussein was an extremely brutal dictator and he killed anybody who got in his way, including the members of the parliament that he killed as a result of the coup that got him into the powerful position of leader. He is also responsible for the attempted genocide of the Shia and others in Iraq. I see no reason why he should not stand trial on all of these charges and that he should be convicted of the attempted genocide of whole populations of Iraq.
Monday, March 20, 2006
The baby MB judgment
Family Law Week: An NHS Trust v MB & Anor [2006] EWHC 507 (Fam)
The case of baby MB is heart wrenching. At the age of 7 weeks his parents noticed that something was wrong with their newborn son, and they took him to the local children's hospital. He has been in the hospital ever since it was discovered that he has SMA type 1 - spinal muscle atrophy. The baby is on a ventilator and he is fed via a PEG tube. He is given intensive around the clock nursing, and he receives regular physiotherapy to help with his condition.
The case went to court because the baby's doctors want to end his life by withdrawing the ventilation, and the parents disagreed with the doctors. Thanks to the journalists at the BBC new the case was made public and so we, the public, have been kept informed about the burdens and the benefits faced by Baby MB on a daily basis. The baby's doctors and medical team believed that the best option available was to removed the ventilation and end his life. The medical experts brought in by each side, as well as the appointed guardian, all believed that based on the "iffy" notion of quality of life, a decision should be made to end his existence.
In a somewhat lengthy judgment, Justice Holman disagreed with the conclusions of the medical team, concerning what is meant by quality of life and whether or not the burdens of this baby's life outweigh the benefits. In part Justice Holman said:
The judge has been very thorough in considering the evidence before him, and despite the overwhelming evidence of all of the experts in the case, as well as the conclusions of the guardian ad litem, he concluded that in this case, since baby M was cognitive then his life must have some value, and that includes the interaction that he has with his parents. In other words Justice Holman has disagreed with the experts that baby M would be better off dead and that the ventilation should be withdrawn. At the same time he stated that should the baby’s condition continue to deteriorate and further invasive procedures were required, then the doctors do not have to go ahead with such procedures, allowing the child to die naturally, rather than forcing his death because of the withdrawal of his ventilation.
This judgment on baby M is very sound. It is a judgment that is based upon case law, not just what is before the judge. Justice Holman even considered the case of Charlotte Wyatt and whether or not her case fitted the circumstances of baby M. He also considered a variety of other cases that had been brought before the British justice system, and he used as a part of his decision-making these other cases that have provided procedures for medical staff in hospitals where they are faced with patients who have no chance of recovering from their condition:
1
The case of baby MB is heart wrenching. At the age of 7 weeks his parents noticed that something was wrong with their newborn son, and they took him to the local children's hospital. He has been in the hospital ever since it was discovered that he has SMA type 1 - spinal muscle atrophy. The baby is on a ventilator and he is fed via a PEG tube. He is given intensive around the clock nursing, and he receives regular physiotherapy to help with his condition.
The case went to court because the baby's doctors want to end his life by withdrawing the ventilation, and the parents disagreed with the doctors. Thanks to the journalists at the BBC new the case was made public and so we, the public, have been kept informed about the burdens and the benefits faced by Baby MB on a daily basis. The baby's doctors and medical team believed that the best option available was to removed the ventilation and end his life. The medical experts brought in by each side, as well as the appointed guardian, all believed that based on the "iffy" notion of quality of life, a decision should be made to end his existence.
In a somewhat lengthy judgment, Justice Holman disagreed with the conclusions of the medical team, concerning what is meant by quality of life and whether or not the burdens of this baby's life outweigh the benefits. In part Justice Holman said:
30. There is thus a very formidable body of medical evidence of very high quality in this case which is all without exception, to the same effect. Although there is much detail in the various individual reports and also in the considerable oral evidence which I heard, I believe that the summary under the heading "Present Condition", and one or two further quotes from the first part of the Joint Expert Report gives a fair overall summary of the medical opinion.Present Condition
M has lived for a long time for a child with his condition (type 1 spinal muscular atrophy). The main reason for this is the very high standard of care he has received from his family and hospital staff. The experts believe that the continuous bowel antibiotics that he has been receiving may have played an important role in his long term survival. He is not in a persistent vegetative state. He is able to make some very limited voluntary responses to his environment. It is not possible to give an opinion about his cognitive function as this is impossible to assess. His responses vary both during the day and from day to day. These minor changes are not clinically significant and do not change the conclusions of our report. Most children with his condition would have normal cognitive function. Four of the experts had reviewed a recent video, which documents some movements in M. The presence or absence of these movements does not change our conclusions below. These movements are not a useful prognostic indicator for the long term and do not alter the long term natural history of the condition. It is very difficult to assess how much discomfort or distress M experiences. It is inevitable that some interventions particularly blood sampling, deep endotracheal suction, physiotherapy and bagging are uncomfortable for him. An assessment of his quality of life is very difficult. Two of the experts noted that assessment of quality of life in people with neuromuscular disorders by health professionals is often pessimistic…
We do not believe that medication (either anticonvulsant medication or analgesic and sedative medication) is impairing his awareness, responsiveness or motor abilities.
We were agreed that M's prognosis is very poor and that death is inevitable. We were agreed that a management choice should not prolong any distress and if possible be acceptable to the family."
Under the heading of "option 4", to which I will later refer, but which is the option of withdrawing ventilation and allowing him to die, the Joint Expert Report says "The experts all agreed that if only M's interests were being considered then this option would be in his best interests."
The judge has been very thorough in considering the evidence before him, and despite the overwhelming evidence of all of the experts in the case, as well as the conclusions of the guardian ad litem, he concluded that in this case, since baby M was cognitive then his life must have some value, and that includes the interaction that he has with his parents. In other words Justice Holman has disagreed with the experts that baby M would be better off dead and that the ventilation should be withdrawn. At the same time he stated that should the baby’s condition continue to deteriorate and further invasive procedures were required, then the doctors do not have to go ahead with such procedures, allowing the child to die naturally, rather than forcing his death because of the withdrawal of his ventilation.
This judgment on baby M is very sound. It is a judgment that is based upon case law, not just what is before the judge. Justice Holman even considered the case of Charlotte Wyatt and whether or not her case fitted the circumstances of baby M. He also considered a variety of other cases that had been brought before the British justice system, and he used as a part of his decision-making these other cases that have provided procedures for medical staff in hospitals where they are faced with patients who have no chance of recovering from their condition:
1
2. Of the many reported authorities which have been placed before me, the two which, in different respects, may most nearly approach the circumstances of the present case are Re C (A baby) [1996] 2 FLR 43 decided by Sir Stephen Brown P on 3rd April 1996, and Re C (A minor) (Medical treatment) [1998] Lloyd's Law Reports Medical, page1, decided by Sir Stephen Brown P on 18th November 1997. In the first case he did make an order giving approval and permission for artificial ventilation to be discontinued to a baby of 3 months, which would result (as in the present case) in immediate death. But in that case, as a result of meningitis, the baby had suffered "a serious degree of brain damage" and was "subjected to repeated convulsions due to the brain damage". She had what was described as "cerebral blindness" and could not see or hear in any normal sense of those terms. Sir Stephen said "It is almost a living death. She is not in a coma as medically defined; she has a very low awareness of anything, if at all". I could not use that description of M. Further, in that case the parents themselves agreed with the decision (see page 45 C).
13. In the second case, the child concerned, like M, suffered from Type 1 SMA. She, like M, was conscious. Further, she was able to recognise her parents and to smile. However, unlike M, she was only on intermittent positive pressure ventilation. The doctors considered, and the parents agreed, that she should be weaned off that ventilation before she became fully dependant upon it. The issue was whether, if or when she suffered a respiratory arrest, positive pressure ventilation should be restarted. The parents sought an order that it should be, but Sir Stephen Brown P declined to grant one, in part because of the well established principle that a court will not order a doctor to undertake a course of treatment which the doctor is unwilling to do (see page 5, left hand column); but also because Sir Stephen expressly held that it was in the best interests of the child not later to reimpose ventilation if needed (page 5, right hand column). Since the doctors considered that a respiratory arrest would be inevitable (see page 3) the case is very close to the present one. But it did not involve or contemplate the immediate death of the conscious child; and the actual withdrawal of intermittent ventilation was agreed to, and supported, by the parents.
There were other cases that were also considered by justice Holman in his decision. In each case there has been an established principle that the treatment is not invasive and that it will not have the effect of prolonging life in a very hopeless situation. Take for example the situation where someone presents to the emergency department and is at the point of being clinically dead at the time of presenting for treatment. The question has to be how far will the doctors go in prolonging life in such a situation because of the nature of the medical equipment that is available today? There are times when such procedures might be considered excessive, with the end result that a brain dead person is attached to a machine, and a relative has to give permission for the machine to be switched off. There are two legal implications that must always be considered: (1) has the action led to the death of the person via intentional homicide that would lead to charges for criminal behaviour; and (2) is the action likely to be seen as negligence by the patient’s family?
There are times when the prolonging of a life is an unnecessary burden upon the patient. Take for example the case of an elderly woman who is nearing her 99th birthday. She begins to have a series of heart attacks that are in effect the signaling of the end of her life. In such a situation there is a need to consider how far the medical team should go in attempting to revive this elderly patient before the lack of intervention might be considered negligent. At what point in time in this case would it be considered the revival of the patient to include procedures that are invasive and burdensome. There has to be a point in such a case where common sense prevails for the patient is at the end of her life, and invasive procedures should not necessarily be used if they are in fact a burden to the patient.
Keeping this in mind, one can see how Justice Holman has considered all of the angles relating to baby M’s condition and his prognosis. The NHS trust wanted to discontinue the treatment. The expert witnesses and the guardian ad litem agreed with the doctors and medical team of the case, that according to their standards the baby’s life is intolerable and therefore they should be allowed to remove the ventilator thus causing baby M to stop breathing. However, what was more important in this case is that baby M is cognizant. This has led Justice Holman to reach the conclusion that quality of life issues should not be clouded by the opinions of others with regard to what is to be considered tolerable or intolerable. As a result he concluded that the present treatment was to remain intact, but if the baby’s condition reached further deterioration such that he has a heart attack, then the doctors do not have to initiate invasive treatment for the heart attack, thus allowing the baby to die from natural causes rather than from a contrived cause, which is what the NHS trust had requested.
There are times when the prolonging of a life is an unnecessary burden upon the patient. Take for example the case of an elderly woman who is nearing her 99th birthday. She begins to have a series of heart attacks that are in effect the signaling of the end of her life. In such a situation there is a need to consider how far the medical team should go in attempting to revive this elderly patient before the lack of intervention might be considered negligent. At what point in time in this case would it be considered the revival of the patient to include procedures that are invasive and burdensome. There has to be a point in such a case where common sense prevails for the patient is at the end of her life, and invasive procedures should not necessarily be used if they are in fact a burden to the patient.
Keeping this in mind, one can see how Justice Holman has considered all of the angles relating to baby M’s condition and his prognosis. The NHS trust wanted to discontinue the treatment. The expert witnesses and the guardian ad litem agreed with the doctors and medical team of the case, that according to their standards the baby’s life is intolerable and therefore they should be allowed to remove the ventilator thus causing baby M to stop breathing. However, what was more important in this case is that baby M is cognizant. This has led Justice Holman to reach the conclusion that quality of life issues should not be clouded by the opinions of others with regard to what is to be considered tolerable or intolerable. As a result he concluded that the present treatment was to remain intact, but if the baby’s condition reached further deterioration such that he has a heart attack, then the doctors do not have to initiate invasive treatment for the heart attack, thus allowing the baby to die from natural causes rather than from a contrived cause, which is what the NHS trust had requested.
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Two more deaths after RU-486 in US
Two more deaths after RU-486 in US
Once again we hear of more deaths because women have been misled into believing that RU486 is a safe and effective alternative to surgical abortion. Even after the announcement of two more deaths there is an unwillingness to accept that RU486 is neither a safe or an effective alternative for women who insist upon going through with an abortion.
In the USA the abortion mills that are run by Planned Parenthood are the main sources of providing women with this chemical cocktail that can lead to certain death. Planned Parenthood is not interested in saving lives. It only wants to kill the child within the womb, and it would seem that if the mother just happens to die as well, then let's just pass the buck.
I remain totally against abortion on demand, but if so long as this evil is legally sanctioned, then the means of carrying out the grisley task of killing babies must be done in such a way that the mother's life is not in jeopardy. The abortion drug RU486 fails to meet the safety criteria and it should be pulled from the market.
As far as Australia is concerned, the female members of the parliament who were so stupid that they voted in favour of making a change to the main safeguard against allowing maternal deaths to rise, need to think carefully about what they have done. Do they really think that they are advancing the rights of women by trying to force this unsafe abortion alternative into the Australian abortion mill market? For shame on both the women and men who thoughtlessly voted to take this power away from the Minister of Health without even checking the safety record of RU486.
Addenda: Since I wrote this post the FDA have announced that in the case of these two women, one woman's death was not related to RU486. The other case is still under investigation. However, they also claimed that there was no link between RU486 and the bacteria C. sordellii. The way in which this lack of a link was determined is questionable. In this case the FDA tested for bacteria in batches of Mifepristone and Misoprostone. The reason that it is questionable is that the bacteria itself is naturally occurring within some women. It is because Mifepristone works to suppress the immune system that a woman who has this bacteria anyway is at a greater risk than a woman who does not have the bacteria.
What this means therefore, is that the FDA have sought a way to be able to claim the lack of a link by doing an unnecessary test that was likely to give a negative result. This kind of testing is totally unprofessional.
Once again we hear of more deaths because women have been misled into believing that RU486 is a safe and effective alternative to surgical abortion. Even after the announcement of two more deaths there is an unwillingness to accept that RU486 is neither a safe or an effective alternative for women who insist upon going through with an abortion.
In the USA the abortion mills that are run by Planned Parenthood are the main sources of providing women with this chemical cocktail that can lead to certain death. Planned Parenthood is not interested in saving lives. It only wants to kill the child within the womb, and it would seem that if the mother just happens to die as well, then let's just pass the buck.
I remain totally against abortion on demand, but if so long as this evil is legally sanctioned, then the means of carrying out the grisley task of killing babies must be done in such a way that the mother's life is not in jeopardy. The abortion drug RU486 fails to meet the safety criteria and it should be pulled from the market.
As far as Australia is concerned, the female members of the parliament who were so stupid that they voted in favour of making a change to the main safeguard against allowing maternal deaths to rise, need to think carefully about what they have done. Do they really think that they are advancing the rights of women by trying to force this unsafe abortion alternative into the Australian abortion mill market? For shame on both the women and men who thoughtlessly voted to take this power away from the Minister of Health without even checking the safety record of RU486.
Addenda: Since I wrote this post the FDA have announced that in the case of these two women, one woman's death was not related to RU486. The other case is still under investigation. However, they also claimed that there was no link between RU486 and the bacteria C. sordellii. The way in which this lack of a link was determined is questionable. In this case the FDA tested for bacteria in batches of Mifepristone and Misoprostone. The reason that it is questionable is that the bacteria itself is naturally occurring within some women. It is because Mifepristone works to suppress the immune system that a woman who has this bacteria anyway is at a greater risk than a woman who does not have the bacteria.
What this means therefore, is that the FDA have sought a way to be able to claim the lack of a link by doing an unnecessary test that was likely to give a negative result. This kind of testing is totally unprofessional.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
Jihad and Islamism
Hyscience
Eurabia has reported on the threat to Spain, Denmark and Italy. All of these countries are targets for the Islamic extremists for a variety of reasons.
Eurabia has reported on the threat to Spain, Denmark and Italy. All of these countries are targets for the Islamic extremists for a variety of reasons.
Denmark has become a target because of the publishing of cartoons that are alleged to be representing Mohammed. The reason that the cartoons were published in the first place, was not to make fun of Muslims, but to let them know that freedom of expression in Denmark is not going to be suppressed as a result of the efforts of the Islamists to silence all opposition. The cartoons were inoffensive, for I have seen and heard about cartoons that are much worse that have been published in student papers within Canada. The Danish government correctly, in my view, refused to intervene and to force a retraction and apology from the editor of the paper concerned. The stance in Denmark, that is a people who refuse to become Dhimmis and to appease the Islamists, is one that is strong, and I believe that we should all take the same attitude. The more we appease, the stronger they become, because in their eyes rolling over and being appeasers does not bring about respect for the other person.
Spain is a target because Islam continues to fight a war that ended in the 16th century when the Islamists were defeated and removed from Spain. Let us not forget that the Islamists have always been territorial and that they seek to take what does not belong to them - namely Spain.
The Spanish Inquisition happened for a reason. It was designed to flush out those who were giving financial support to the Islamists, as well as flushing out those Jews who were seeking power by pretending to have converted to Christianity.
Italy is a target because Rome is the seat of Christianity. The aim of the Islamists is to destroy the Vatican and to take over Italy. If they were successful in such an endeavour then they would have struck a serious blow to Christianity, thus subjecting the balance of the non-Muslim world to their form of domination. This is the true One World Order that we often hear mentioned but few understand its implications.
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Sick Baby's Dad Says His Son's Life Is Worth Living :: Life Issues :: Hyscience
Sick Baby's Dad Says His Son's Life Is Worth Living :: Life Issues :: Hyscience
This is the latest on baby MB. The father and mother, who are Muslim, believe that their baby's life is worth living. They believe that their baby son is a gift from God. They told the court that doctors should not be deciding when their son should die.
This is the latest on baby MB. The father and mother, who are Muslim, believe that their baby's life is worth living. They believe that their baby son is a gift from God. They told the court that doctors should not be deciding when their son should die.
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
BioEdge 194: Stem cell researchers propose international guidelines
BioEdge 194: Stem cell researchers propose international guidelines
After the disgrace of the South Korean stem cell research debacle, a group of doctors, philosophers, lawyers, editors and others have banded together to propose international guidelines for stem cell research.
Whilst this seems to be a reasonable reaction to the growing demand for stem cell research, one has to look a little harder at what is being proposed, because the Hinxton group is not proposing something that will put an end to the attempt to clone embryonic stem cells. It is in fact an attempt to push for the easing of restrictions in countries where this research is being carried out.
A group of 60 scientists, doctors, philosophers, lawyers, editors and
others have put forward a proposal for international guidelines for stem cell
research.
After the disgrace of the South Korean stem cell research debacle, a group of doctors, philosophers, lawyers, editors and others have banded together to propose international guidelines for stem cell research.
Whilst this seems to be a reasonable reaction to the growing demand for stem cell research, one has to look a little harder at what is being proposed, because the Hinxton group is not proposing something that will put an end to the attempt to clone embryonic stem cells. It is in fact an attempt to push for the easing of restrictions in countries where this research is being carried out.
A group of 60 scientists, doctors, philosophers, lawyers, editors and
others have put forward a proposal for international guidelines for stem cell
research.
"Inconsistent and conflicting laws prevent some scientists from
engaging in this research and hinder global collaboration," the Hinxton Group
complains. The thrust of the declaration is very supportive of cloning for
research and embryonic stem cell research.This is described as "an immense promise for good" which will increase knowledge of human biology and which may lead to new treatments for disease and injury.
The group's steering committee is largely British, and overwhelmingly skewed
toward utilitarianism. It includes the controversial ethicists John Harris, of
the University of Manchester, and Julian Savulescu, of Oxford University.The committee argues that restrictions on research should be minimal and flexible enough to accommodate rapid change. Scientists should be free to do work abroad which is banned in their own countries. (German scientists, for instance, can be
prosecuted for working on projects abroad if these would be illegal in Germany.)
The Hinxton Group began its work before the Korean stem cell scandal. That
debacle has now strengthened the hand of opponents of destructive embryo
research and research cloning. However, the Group's 15 principles and strategies
may help to establish a united front for its supporters and give stem cell
research an ethical foundation.
The guidelines mention, but take no position on, two cutting-edge developments in stem cell research: the creation of human-animal hybrids and of gametes from stem cells. ~ Washington Post, Mar 2; Hinxton Group declaration
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Judge Rules Doctors Must Let Baby Charlotte Die :: Life Issues :: Hyscience#more
Judge Rules Doctors Must Let Baby Charlotte Die :: Life Issues :: Hyscience#more
Charlotte Wyatt was only 458 grams when she was born about 11 weeks premature. Since her untimely birth, Charlotte's parents have had to battle with the doctors at the local hospital, as well as with the courts, because the doctors keep seeking permission to be able to not give Charlotte life saving treatment if she needs it.
This little girl had already proved that the doctors were wrong about her will to live, and despite the court ordered DNR, little Charlotte had battled on until she was taken home last October. Now Charlotte is facing a new battle in her will to live because once again the doctors at the local hospital do not want to save her life. Charlotte is gravely ill because of an infection. According to available information, her health has deteriorated considerably. The same judge who had previously sentenced this baby to die, has done it again, and he has ordered that no life saving measures are to be taken for Charlotte.
I take it that Justice Hedley has never heard the parable of the unjust judge!!!!
Charlotte Wyatt was only 458 grams when she was born about 11 weeks premature. Since her untimely birth, Charlotte's parents have had to battle with the doctors at the local hospital, as well as with the courts, because the doctors keep seeking permission to be able to not give Charlotte life saving treatment if she needs it.
This little girl had already proved that the doctors were wrong about her will to live, and despite the court ordered DNR, little Charlotte had battled on until she was taken home last October. Now Charlotte is facing a new battle in her will to live because once again the doctors at the local hospital do not want to save her life. Charlotte is gravely ill because of an infection. According to available information, her health has deteriorated considerably. The same judge who had previously sentenced this baby to die, has done it again, and he has ordered that no life saving measures are to be taken for Charlotte.
I take it that Justice Hedley has never heard the parable of the unjust judge!!!!
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Fatwa Me!
Fatwa Me!
This is a little bit different from my usual style of blog. However, I do believe in freedom of expression. The current round of riots, embassy burning, the inevitable deaths due to the riots, is sufficient reason for me to speak up and pass on this URL for those who are interested in joining in the Internet protest against one group of people thinking that they can whip others up into a frenzy and hence stifle freedom of expression.
The cartoons that have inspired this outrage are in fact quite inoffensive. They do point out the truth about Mohammed, who was the original terrorist who roamed the countryside forcing citizens to join Islam or be killed.
Islam, as it was practised by Mohammed, and how the imams and mullahs attempt to disguise it, is not a religion of peace. It is a religion, or political system that involves enslavement of the people. It is extremely stifling. The women within Islam suffer horrendous injuries at the hands of their husbands.
Most of the followers of the radical imams are so brainwashed by what they are hearing that they become willing to kill themselves for the sake of something that is nothing more than the silver lining in the clouds. The woman who joined with her husband in killing so many in Jordan proved this when she went on the TV and one could see the glazed look in her eyes as she showed no expression and no remorse for what she had done to others. It did not worry her that there were children who would become victims of the bomb that was strapped to her body.
Although this is slightly different from my other posts it is indeed relevant to the issue of the Culture of Death.
This is a little bit different from my usual style of blog. However, I do believe in freedom of expression. The current round of riots, embassy burning, the inevitable deaths due to the riots, is sufficient reason for me to speak up and pass on this URL for those who are interested in joining in the Internet protest against one group of people thinking that they can whip others up into a frenzy and hence stifle freedom of expression.
The cartoons that have inspired this outrage are in fact quite inoffensive. They do point out the truth about Mohammed, who was the original terrorist who roamed the countryside forcing citizens to join Islam or be killed.
Islam, as it was practised by Mohammed, and how the imams and mullahs attempt to disguise it, is not a religion of peace. It is a religion, or political system that involves enslavement of the people. It is extremely stifling. The women within Islam suffer horrendous injuries at the hands of their husbands.
Most of the followers of the radical imams are so brainwashed by what they are hearing that they become willing to kill themselves for the sake of something that is nothing more than the silver lining in the clouds. The woman who joined with her husband in killing so many in Jordan proved this when she went on the TV and one could see the glazed look in her eyes as she showed no expression and no remorse for what she had done to others. It did not worry her that there were children who would become victims of the bomb that was strapped to her body.
Although this is slightly different from my other posts it is indeed relevant to the issue of the Culture of Death.
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Life and Death have meanings of hidden dimenson
There is more than one dimension to the meaning of “life” and “death”. We think of life in terms of our mortal lives – that is we are the centre of the very existence of life, and we have a finite beginning and end. Yet, our worldly life and death is only one dimension for the meaning of what is life and death.
I have repeatedly asked Fundamentalists to explain what is meant by these terms. I never seem to get a response from them relating to the state of the soul. Yet this is how we are viewed by God. Each time we sin, we begin to slowly die inside of ourselves. Another dimension of Life is that it is the grace or the very breath of God, existing within us, so that we, in turn exist in the world. The flip side of the spiritual life is spiritual death. It is the withdrawal of grace – a free gift from God that feeds and nourishes us on a daily basis – that causes the death of the soul because of sin.
I had my own brush with what it means to come face to face with my own mortality last year when my next oldest sister was suddenly diagnosed with bone cancer and died. She did not make it to her 53rd birthday. It is a shock when someone so close in age suddenly dies like that and it causes one to recognize the reality that we are only here for a short time. Yet, her spiritual existence continues even though her flesh has been consumed in the fire from a cremation.
Christians sometimes tend to negate that the animals, birds, and even the flora are the creation of God, and that it is God that gives life to these things. We have the superior intellect and the superior soul, but these other creations of the Creator also have their own form of soul. How Christians view the souls of animals is a juxtaposition of the way in which an atheist sees the life of an animal.
As I digress for a moment, I want to briefly consider the views of the Greens and their counterparts who seem to think that animals have feelings on the same level as humans. For this reason, they demonstrate against cooking live lobster because of the sounds that come from a cooking pot. They are blissfully unaware of the fact that God created these creatures so that we would have food. They also get uptight about cutting down a tree, sometimes behaving in a way that suggests that they worship trees as though the trees are gods. Their sense of proportion with regard to human life and the lives of these other creatures is truly distorted. To highlight their inconsistency, I point to the fact that this same group are the ones who promote the murder of the unborn on the grounds that a foetus is not legally recognized as having a life.
The abortion debate centres upon when life begins, but this debate has implications that is infringing upon giving justice to the unborn and to the parents of the unborn when a child has been killed as a result of a car accident. A recent decision in Hawaii has led to a further denial of the rights of the unborn and a man has been allowed to get away with the manslaughter of an unborn child because of the lack of a legal definition of when life begins. It would seem that the activist judges have outsmarted themselves because now it is possible for irresponsible drivers to escape prosecution when the victim is an unborn infant. Once again we see an overwhelming sense of a lack of justice that has been allowed to permeate the world, in the name of feminism, modernism and political correctness.
Another debate that rages in this modern world of ours is that of the concept of the Immaculate Conception. The reforming fathers such as Martin Luther believed that Mary was in fact conceived without the stain of original sin. The problem centres upon the philosophy that has stemmed from the age of the “Enlightenment”, as well as anti-Catholic rhetoric and bigotry. The Fundamentalists and Evangelicals who are so keen to deny the Immaculate Conception fail to see that they are in fact denying that Jesus is the Christ through their very failure to accept the Immaculate Conception. This dogma, which centres not upon Mary, but upon the origins of Jesus Christ, states that Mary is the woman with whom Satan has enmity. If she had sinned, then she would be a friend of Satan, and she would not have grace within, yet the angel gave the greeting: “Hail, Full of Grace”, (which also bestows upon Mary, the TITLE – “Full of Grace” – according to the Will of God.)
The denial of the life of an unborn infant has now spread to the point that people are willing to deny the life of those who are incapacitated. The danger to the incapacitated is that there are family members and unscrupulous lawyers who act as public guardians who want the people dead. The Terri Schindler-Schiavo story is in fact the tip of the iceberg. This was a case where hard evidence was not provided and the outcome has the potential of affecting millions of the incapacitated every day of every year. The life safeguards were further eroded by the refusal to properly evaluate the case and Greer’s decision making.
I have repeatedly asked Fundamentalists to explain what is meant by these terms. I never seem to get a response from them relating to the state of the soul. Yet this is how we are viewed by God. Each time we sin, we begin to slowly die inside of ourselves. Another dimension of Life is that it is the grace or the very breath of God, existing within us, so that we, in turn exist in the world. The flip side of the spiritual life is spiritual death. It is the withdrawal of grace – a free gift from God that feeds and nourishes us on a daily basis – that causes the death of the soul because of sin.
I had my own brush with what it means to come face to face with my own mortality last year when my next oldest sister was suddenly diagnosed with bone cancer and died. She did not make it to her 53rd birthday. It is a shock when someone so close in age suddenly dies like that and it causes one to recognize the reality that we are only here for a short time. Yet, her spiritual existence continues even though her flesh has been consumed in the fire from a cremation.
Christians sometimes tend to negate that the animals, birds, and even the flora are the creation of God, and that it is God that gives life to these things. We have the superior intellect and the superior soul, but these other creations of the Creator also have their own form of soul. How Christians view the souls of animals is a juxtaposition of the way in which an atheist sees the life of an animal.
As I digress for a moment, I want to briefly consider the views of the Greens and their counterparts who seem to think that animals have feelings on the same level as humans. For this reason, they demonstrate against cooking live lobster because of the sounds that come from a cooking pot. They are blissfully unaware of the fact that God created these creatures so that we would have food. They also get uptight about cutting down a tree, sometimes behaving in a way that suggests that they worship trees as though the trees are gods. Their sense of proportion with regard to human life and the lives of these other creatures is truly distorted. To highlight their inconsistency, I point to the fact that this same group are the ones who promote the murder of the unborn on the grounds that a foetus is not legally recognized as having a life.
The abortion debate centres upon when life begins, but this debate has implications that is infringing upon giving justice to the unborn and to the parents of the unborn when a child has been killed as a result of a car accident. A recent decision in Hawaii has led to a further denial of the rights of the unborn and a man has been allowed to get away with the manslaughter of an unborn child because of the lack of a legal definition of when life begins. It would seem that the activist judges have outsmarted themselves because now it is possible for irresponsible drivers to escape prosecution when the victim is an unborn infant. Once again we see an overwhelming sense of a lack of justice that has been allowed to permeate the world, in the name of feminism, modernism and political correctness.
Another debate that rages in this modern world of ours is that of the concept of the Immaculate Conception. The reforming fathers such as Martin Luther believed that Mary was in fact conceived without the stain of original sin. The problem centres upon the philosophy that has stemmed from the age of the “Enlightenment”, as well as anti-Catholic rhetoric and bigotry. The Fundamentalists and Evangelicals who are so keen to deny the Immaculate Conception fail to see that they are in fact denying that Jesus is the Christ through their very failure to accept the Immaculate Conception. This dogma, which centres not upon Mary, but upon the origins of Jesus Christ, states that Mary is the woman with whom Satan has enmity. If she had sinned, then she would be a friend of Satan, and she would not have grace within, yet the angel gave the greeting: “Hail, Full of Grace”, (which also bestows upon Mary, the TITLE – “Full of Grace” – according to the Will of God.)
The denial of the life of an unborn infant has now spread to the point that people are willing to deny the life of those who are incapacitated. The danger to the incapacitated is that there are family members and unscrupulous lawyers who act as public guardians who want the people dead. The Terri Schindler-Schiavo story is in fact the tip of the iceberg. This was a case where hard evidence was not provided and the outcome has the potential of affecting millions of the incapacitated every day of every year. The life safeguards were further eroded by the refusal to properly evaluate the case and Greer’s decision making.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Who cares if Haleigh lives or dies?
Catholics in the Public Square">Haleigh Poutre is only 11 years old, and she has been on life support since she was nearly beaten to death last September. Ever since she was rushed to hospital by her relatives, it is as if no one has cared about whether Haleigh lives or dies, except for the man who is accused of beating her to the point of near death. Up until now he has been the lone family voice who has been advocating for her life, which is in stark contrast to the child's real mother.
Haleigh's short life has not been a picnic. She had been neglected by her biological mother, so she was removed and given to her aunt, who did adopt Haleigh. However, the aunt then met and married the man who has been acting as Haleigh's stepfather, (and dare I call him her advocate for life?). The department of social services was informed of charges of neglect and abuse against the aunt, but they failed to act. After Haleigh ended up in hospital, having being bashed within an inch of her life, the aunt and stepfather ended up being arrested over the bashing. Two days after being released from jail, Haleigh's adoptive mother, and grandmother were found to be shot dead. Mr. Strickland faces fresh charges of murder if Haleigh dies, and so he has a vested interest in keeping her alive (but really is that such a crime, that he does not want her to die in such a fashion as having her nutrition and hydration withdrawn?)
Haleigh has been made a ward of the state, and the officials of the department sought to have a DNR placed upon her charts, and they sought permission to withdraw all life support. Haleigh's biological mother joined with the departmental officials who are seeking to end Haleigh's life. What kind of mother would respond to her child's desparate situation by making the following statement?:
CBS reporter SHARYN ALFONSI: This is Haleigh Poutre before, before her teeth were broken, before her tiny body was burned and before she was beaten, doctors say, into a vegetative state. You're her mother.
Ms. ALLISON AVRETT (Biological Mother): Yes.
ALFONSI: What do you want for her?
AVRETT: I want her to rest.
ALFONSI: And right now?
AVRETT: She's not. Being kept like that is not a life.
So it would seem that Ms Avrett sees her daughter in terms of what is, and what is not a life. Her comments point to a woman who does not love her daughter, and who wants her dead.
However, Haleigh, it seems has other ideas because no sooner did the courts decide against Mr Strickland and said that the life support could be withdrawn when Haleigh began to show signs of coming out of her coma. The doctors who have written off Haleigh have not been doing their work as doctors because they have been more interested in ending her life, than they have been in rehabilitating this child, and giving her a chance to live a normal life.
This child is too young to be able to tell anyone what her end of life wishes might be. An adult has to make the decision for her. As usual the court has refused to listen to the one person who wanted them to err on the side of choosing life. It would seem that the court decided against the petition of Mr. Strickland because of his vested interest in keeping the child alive. The case sounds like Maria Korp and Terri Schiavo redux. Only this time it is the mother who wants her child to die.
Even after Haleigh has shown signs of coming out of the coma, it would seem that her mother is intent upon giving the all too famous line from the culture of death: "the movements that you have seen is nothing more than a reflex action".
Well there are people who care if Haleigh lives or dies. Michelle Malken has spoken up and is advocating for Haleigh's life, and there are others in the blogosphere who care about whether or not this child is given the opportunity to live a full life.
Haleigh is an innocent child. She is not a criminal and she does not deserve to have a death sentence. It is truly amazing that the more liberal types in the community will raise their voices in protest over the impending death of a criminal who has been sentenced to death because of crimes committed against others, but their silence in the case of innocent disabled people being condemned to death is totally deafening. It is about time that these Hollywood activists were called into line and forced to get their act together with regard to priorities.
If Haleigh is allowed to die at the hands of the state, then we will all be moving headlong along the slippery slope of destruction. It is time to wake up and it is time to stop the killing of innocent people in the name of the culture of death.
Haleigh's short life has not been a picnic. She had been neglected by her biological mother, so she was removed and given to her aunt, who did adopt Haleigh. However, the aunt then met and married the man who has been acting as Haleigh's stepfather, (and dare I call him her advocate for life?). The department of social services was informed of charges of neglect and abuse against the aunt, but they failed to act. After Haleigh ended up in hospital, having being bashed within an inch of her life, the aunt and stepfather ended up being arrested over the bashing. Two days after being released from jail, Haleigh's adoptive mother, and grandmother were found to be shot dead. Mr. Strickland faces fresh charges of murder if Haleigh dies, and so he has a vested interest in keeping her alive (but really is that such a crime, that he does not want her to die in such a fashion as having her nutrition and hydration withdrawn?)
Haleigh has been made a ward of the state, and the officials of the department sought to have a DNR placed upon her charts, and they sought permission to withdraw all life support. Haleigh's biological mother joined with the departmental officials who are seeking to end Haleigh's life. What kind of mother would respond to her child's desparate situation by making the following statement?:
CBS reporter SHARYN ALFONSI: This is Haleigh Poutre before, before her teeth were broken, before her tiny body was burned and before she was beaten, doctors say, into a vegetative state. You're her mother.
Ms. ALLISON AVRETT (Biological Mother): Yes.
ALFONSI: What do you want for her?
AVRETT: I want her to rest.
ALFONSI: And right now?
AVRETT: She's not. Being kept like that is not a life.
So it would seem that Ms Avrett sees her daughter in terms of what is, and what is not a life. Her comments point to a woman who does not love her daughter, and who wants her dead.
However, Haleigh, it seems has other ideas because no sooner did the courts decide against Mr Strickland and said that the life support could be withdrawn when Haleigh began to show signs of coming out of her coma. The doctors who have written off Haleigh have not been doing their work as doctors because they have been more interested in ending her life, than they have been in rehabilitating this child, and giving her a chance to live a normal life.
This child is too young to be able to tell anyone what her end of life wishes might be. An adult has to make the decision for her. As usual the court has refused to listen to the one person who wanted them to err on the side of choosing life. It would seem that the court decided against the petition of Mr. Strickland because of his vested interest in keeping the child alive. The case sounds like Maria Korp and Terri Schiavo redux. Only this time it is the mother who wants her child to die.
Even after Haleigh has shown signs of coming out of the coma, it would seem that her mother is intent upon giving the all too famous line from the culture of death: "the movements that you have seen is nothing more than a reflex action".
Well there are people who care if Haleigh lives or dies. Michelle Malken has spoken up and is advocating for Haleigh's life, and there are others in the blogosphere who care about whether or not this child is given the opportunity to live a full life.
Haleigh is an innocent child. She is not a criminal and she does not deserve to have a death sentence. It is truly amazing that the more liberal types in the community will raise their voices in protest over the impending death of a criminal who has been sentenced to death because of crimes committed against others, but their silence in the case of innocent disabled people being condemned to death is totally deafening. It is about time that these Hollywood activists were called into line and forced to get their act together with regard to priorities.
If Haleigh is allowed to die at the hands of the state, then we will all be moving headlong along the slippery slope of destruction. It is time to wake up and it is time to stop the killing of innocent people in the name of the culture of death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)