Must Read Monday: Ethical and moral questions raised by legal battle over Charlie GardJuly 10, 2017
The case of baby Charlie Gard has captivated the attention of many. The issues are complex: he and his parents are citizens of a sovereign state with socialized medicine. Their infant son was born with an debilitating and fatal genetic disorder. An experimental treatment has been developed in the United States but has not received any of the approvals necessary for administration in foreign countries. The state (the UK) via its medical experts, have argued that Charlie should be allowed to die. His parents insist otherwise. Both the Pope and the President of the United States have weighed in and the parents have now been given 48 hours to produce new evidence that Charlie should receive further treatment.
The right affect is to feel pain for these parents and to ask ourselves a series of very sober questions:
- Whatever we’re willing to do for Charlie Gard, are we equally willing to do for every other terminally ill child born in a nation that does not have the same medical technology we have here in America?
- Whatever we’re willing to do for Charlie’s parents, including bringing them to the U.S. and granting them the rights of citizens by setting aside all current immigration hurdles, are we equally willing to do for every other parent in the world who wants a better life for their child in the U.S.?
- The pro-life question has to be at what point do we believe what we say we believe – that life comes from and returns to God and that we are pro-life from conception to natural death?
- Ultimately there’s a question here about where we place our hope.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis put a temporary hold on a new policy that would allow transgender individuals to enlist in the military, requesting for further review. However, that hold does not prevent individuals who are already serving from transitioning. Last week, military training documents were leaked on this topic, and The Federalist reveals this new policy is a significant departure from previous expectations for soldiers.
The next bullet point adds, “all Soldiers should be respectful of the privacy and modesty concerns of others. However, transgender Soldiers are not required or expected to modify or adjust their behavior based on the fact that they do not ‘match’ other Soldiers.” This is a first. The military is normally in the business of telling soldiers to “modify or adjust their behavior” all the time.
There was a significant development in ongoing fight against ISIS in Iraq. The Iraqi government has declared Mosul delivered from ISIS. While this does not mean the end to the terrorist group, it is welcome news to many in the Middle East. Please continue in your prayerful and financial support of Christians in Iraq through the ministry of our partners at Iraqi Christian Relief.
Related: Want to spend your vacation helping Christians stay in the Middle East? Simply go and spend your money there. — Christianity Today
While Congress debates health care reform in Washington, states are acting on their own. This article highlights the significance of Oregon’s bill:
The Oregon bill is unique, however, in that patients would have access to the procedure for virtually any reason, at any time, including sex-selective and late-term abortions.
Remember when you thought “that will never happen” in terms of late term or sex selective abortion? That grievous day has arrived. And not only are insurance companies forced to be complicit but doctors may lose their right to conscientious objection.
To see the future of the conversation here in America, consider the current reality in Sweden. The Prime Minister of Sweden says that priests, even those with a conscientious objection to doing so, should be forced to perform same-sex weddings just as mid-wives are forced to perform abortions.