Those Who Hate God, End Up Loving Death
Some slopes truly are slippery. Not necessarily slippery by force of reason or logic (which depend upon assumptions underpinning premises). But spiritual forces and sociological trends are what make a slope slippery. When no-fault divorce was introduced in New Zealand in the 1980 some people argued that it would lead to a dissolution of marriage as an institution. They were mocked as extremists and idiots--as tawdry scaremongerers. Not only was the slope not slippery, there was not slope to be seen or had anywhere--the mockers said.
When Christians point out the likely end results of radical changes to law--particularly laws structuring society according to the biblical blueprints--they face a double jeopardy. When they warn of the slippery slope and what is likely to happen, they are mocked as being cheap alarmists. When the slippery slope actually emerges, they are then mocked for being judgemental and harsh. Rarely are they credited with being right in the first place. For example, when no-fault divorce was introduced, some people argued that it would lead to an inflation of the meaning of marriage. If the union were so tenuous and ephemeral that anyone could just walk away for any reason, then anyone could enter the union. Including homosexuals. Nah. Don't be so idiotic, you ignorant Christian scaremonger!
Now, within 30 short years, homosexual "marriages" have been recognised in law in New Zealand. Today, when Christians protest against that monstrosity, they are not acknowledged as being right all those years ago, they are pilloried as being bigoted, enemies of the human race, unfeeling, human-rights deniers, etc. "Have you no love or feeling or compassion or respect for "gay" people?"
It's the zeitgeist of the times. What humans will to do eventually becomes a human right promoted, sanctioned, and protected by the brute force of an unholy state.
The animation to support no-fault
divorce was based upon an appeal to faux love and pity. "Spare a thought
for those poor people locked into a relationship that is generating so
much suffering and harm and degradation. You must be a hater of the
human race to want to see people locked into such unhappiness." These
arguments are always little more than specious appeals to selective pity. What
became evident over time are the consequent evils of being able
wilfully to dissolve a marriage without fault or cause--such as children
forever blighted and distorted through the selfish narcissistic actions of their
parents. Those with genuine compassion and pity would never have allowed the no-fault divorce in the first place.
Take, another example: euthanasia. The same dynamic is playing out.
Euthanasia rests upon a similar appeal to pity, to a desire to reduce suffering. If it's an individual's choice, what can be wrong? Don't you Christians have any compassion for those that suffer? But compassion is a big tent. Many different kinds of people in diverse circumstances deserve compassion--even of the terminal kind. How about thinking compassionately about the suffering of loved ones and relatives having to care for the terminally ill, or the perpetually disabled, or the mentally stricken? Should not our compassion extend to their suffering and the consequent decision to ease or remove their suffering as well. The suffering and burdens of those who care for ill or perpetually disabled people must also be considered, non? Of course. Over time it will become obvious and clear to everyone.
Thus, the following headline is no surprise:
650 Babies Euthanized in the Netherlands Each Year Under Right to Die law
2 Jan 2015
Just over a decade on from assisted dying being legalised in the
Netherlands, as many as 1 in 33 Dutch people are thought to have died
this way, including 650 babies a year, euthanized so that their parents
don’t have to witness them struggle with disability or disease. The
escalation in death by euthanasia over the last six years has led one
Dutch ethicist, who had been in favour of the law when it was first
passed, to warn “some slopes truly are slippery.”
The article goes on to discuss the latest attempt to introduce "mercy" killing in the UK. The secular elites are also pushing for the same in New Zealand. But in the Netherlands which was the first to introduce "assisted dying" laws (out of love and compassion and respect for human rights, don't you know) things have morphed rapidly over a mere ten years. Now euthanasia is being promoted there as a "lifestyle choice". People who oppose are, naturally, cast as haters of the human race.
However, evidence from the Netherlands, where the first assisted
dying law was passed in 2002, has shown that, far from being a method of
last resort, assisted dying is fast becoming a ‘lifestyle choice’.
People who have chosen to die this way include a 47-year-old divorced
mother of two who was suffering from tinnitus, a loud ringing in the
ears. She left behind a 13-year-old son and a 15-year-old daughter, the Daily Mail has reported.
Her mother told the Mail: “Gaby told the children that she was planning to die, she was in pain and there was no cure for her. “The euthanasia was agreed by doctors and she said her goodbyes and
had time to organise her memorial service. She died a month later. Of
course the children miss her badly, but they understand her decision.”
Sure the children understand her decision. They understand their mother simply did not
love them enough to put them before her own illicit lusts. Try bearing that as you get older and face your own physical infirmities. But the slippery slope is even more relentless. There are lots of ways to suffer apart from physical infirmity. How about mental suffering? Yes, of course. Such suffering cannot be excluded from the right to die.
Although the law was designed to help terminally ill patients have a
dignified death, the right to die has also been granted to a growing
number of people who are physically healthy but have psychological
problems. Official figures show that 13 patients suffering from mental
illness were euthanized in 2011; by 2013 this number had risen to 42
patients.
What about disabled infants? Well, they cannot express their "will to die" but those who love them have a deep and abiding compassion for them. Let's kill them so they don't suffer--sort of the same way that one would "put down" a suffering animal. Their lives will not be worth living. The sub-text is our lives will not be worth living if we have to take care of you. So, it's you or me, kid.
And it is not just adults who are being euthanized. According to the
Royal Dutch Medical Association, as many as 650 babies are killed by
doctors each year because they are deemed to be in pain or facing a life
of suffering.
Writing in the National Review,
Wesley J Smith, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on
Human Exceptionalism has called on those who support assisted dying to
“stop pretending assisted suicide is about terminal illness and admit it
is much more about disability–which is why the disability rights
movement remains so opposed as they are the primary targets. It is
about allowing killing as an acceptable answer to many causes of
suffering, whether terminal or chronic disease, disability, mental
illness, or existential despair.”
Activists who once promoted euthanasia laws in Holland are now changing their minds. But it's too late. The genie is well and truly out of the bottle.
The scale of the deaths has led former supporters of the right to die
to change their minds. One such person is the Dutch ethicist Theo Boer,
who, in 2007, said “there doesn’t need to be a slippery slope when it
comes to euthanasia. A good euthanasia law, in combination with the
euthanasia review procedure, provides the warrants for a stable and
relatively low number of euthanasia.”
However, earlier this year he admitted “Most of my colleagues drew the same conclusion. But we were wrong – terribly wrong, in fact.” Although the numbers of deaths remained steady between 2002 and 2008,
even falling back a little in some years, over the last six years there
has been an exponential growth in the number of assisted dying cases.
1,882 were euthanized in 2002, and by 2006 the number had barely risen,
reaching 1,923. Yet by 2012, 4,188 cases were recorded, and in 2013,
nearly 5,000. Figures aren’t yet available for 2014 but are expected to
have topped the 6,000 mark.
Once the "right to die" is recognised in law, campaigns against it become framed as "anti-human rights". Groups doing the campaigning become cast in the same category as Nazis. Any questioning or challenging of the law becomes immediately pilloried as extremist and oppressive.
This is due in no small part to constant pressure from Dutch Right to
Die Society (NVVE) to push the boundaries of acceptability. Under Dutch
law, GPs can administer injections to end life. The intention was that a
person’s GP, who would have a long term doctor-patient relationship
with that person, would have the option open as a last resort. However,
the NVVE set up a number of travelling euthanasia “End of Life Clinics”,
who either euthanize the person or send them away. On average their
doctors see a patient just three times before killing them.
“The NVVE shows no signs of being satisfied even with these
developments,” Boer has said. “They will not rest until a lethal pill is
made available to anyone over 70 years who wishes to die. Some slopes
truly are slippery.” He warned “I used to be a supporter of legislation. But now, with
twelve years of experience, I take a different view. At the very least,
wait for an honest and intellectually satisfying analysis of the reasons
behind the explosive increase in the numbers.
“Is it because the law should have had better safeguards? Or is it
because the mere existence of such a law is an invitation to see
assisted suicide and euthanasia as a normality instead of a last resort?
Before those questions are answered, don’t go there. Once the genie is
out of the bottle, it is not likely to ever go back in again.”
As always, Christians weep bitterly, but do not despair over such things. We recognise that one of the ways God brings a people to repentance is to let them taste the poisonous fruit of their Unbelief. It was in
exile by the river Chebar that our fathers came to a point of holy disgust at the idolatry of their parents and grandparents as well as disgust at their own evil. Only they then repented, and were eventually restored.
No comments:
Post a Comment