Yes, Virginia, All Pro-Life Issues are Interconnected

I won't lie, I've been looking for an excuse to use this one. Source

So, they are running out of the drug for euthanasia in Oregon because drug companies are refusing to make the drugs used for lethal injections. What?!?! Two things:

1. They use the same drugs for euthanasia that they use for lethal injections? Don't they know that lethal injections aren't pretty nor are they foolproof. Just look at the recent botched executions. Granted, neither of them used the Nembutal. I hope that they don't resort to the new cocktail because of the Nembutal shortage. By the way, Nembutal isn't flawless either. 
2. I am a firm believer that the Holy Spirit works in everything, even those things that we think are immoral or don't like. God doesn't need perfection to do His work. This story has the potential to show people truth. On one hand, since people don't like the idea of murderers being murdered by the state, we're running out of drugs to kill off our sick and dying. Hopefully, that will help more people to understand that murder is wrong whether it's an individual killing another individual, the state killing someone, or a doctor killing someone in the name of "medicine." Where is the consistency in defending the lives of criminals, but not the ill and dying?

I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live -Deuteronomy 30:19

Mothers are Dying in Childbirth in the US

While researching for an NPR interview, I found an inspiring project online called The Safe Motherhood Quilt Project. The woman who is in charge of this project is collecting the names and stories of women who died due to complications in childbirth (or late-term abortion) to bring attention to the horrible maternal mortality rate here in the US. The United States spends more on medicine than nearly anyone else, but we have the highest infant and maternal mortality rate in the industrialized world. Where is all of that money going if it's not to save infants and mothers lives?

There are many reasons why this is happening. Here I list only a few:

1) The overuse of c-sections. Even in a scheduled routine c-section, the mother is twice as likely to die than if she had a vaginal birth.

2) Poor health care for poor people. Women living in poverty are far more likely to die from complications in childbirth than rich women.

3) Poorly staffed medical facilities and poor communication among staff. Many times when a woman dies in childbirth it is because the signs that something was wrong were not noticed or not reported until it was too late. I know medical personnel are only human and they take their jobs very seriously, but they need the support and the tools to do their job better.

For more information: Amnesty International Report

Despite Ethics Committee's Recommendations...

I really hate starting a post like this. "Despite ethics committee's recommendations..." Does anyone listen to ethics committees anymore? Ethics should not be left to the politicians.

Source.

Despite Ethics Committee's recommendations, the President of France has reaffirmed that one of his political goals is to bring voluntary euthanasia to his country. He says that this proposal "will complete and improve the (current) law which was already a step in the direction of human dignity."

What is dignified about telling the handicapped that their lives are worthless? About telling those in pain that their lives are worthless?

What about equating value of life with how "wanted" it is? If a parent doesn't "want" a child, it is not a child and can be disposed of. If a sick person does not "want" to live anymore, their lives are disposable and worthless. It is turning life into a commodity to be created and destroyed at the whim of anyone who has the power and the will. 

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,

before you were born I dedicated you,

a prophet to the nations I appointed you. -Jeremiah 1:5

Even to your old age I am he,

even when your hair is gray I will carry you;

I have done this, and I will lift you up,

I will carry you to safety. - Isaiah 46:4

One Child, Three Parents: What is Wrong with this Picture?

Scientists in the UK have found a way to make a child with three parents.

Yes, you read that correctly.

I wonder if this calls under Pope Paul VI's prophecies somewhere.

In any case, what is exactly wrong with this picture? Scientists have simply found a way for a woman who carries mitochondrial diseases to have a child who is biologically hers. We're only fixing a disease, right?

Source

Let's start at the beginning: We have here a child conceived via IVF. IVF has many serious moral and practical implications. First of all, the success rate is rather poor and it's really, really expensive.  It also creates a life at the expense of others. Life starts at conception, right? Well, more lives are being conceived during IVF than ever see the inside of the mother's womb. The main reason why the Church does not approve of IVF, however, is that it separates sex from procreation. It turns procreation into something that is done impersonally in a lab. To read more, I recommend an article by one of my fellow Ignitum Today columnists, Bernard Toutounji. 

Source

Problemo numero dos: A child's DNA is being messed with. A scholar interviewed by CNN in the original article points out: It crosses "the line that will eventually lead to a eugenic designer baby market." There are already ways for a woman to avoid passing her mitochondrial disease to her children in using a donated egg (see next problem below). The only thing this insures is that the child is genetically related to her. It is laudable to want to spare your child the pain of mitochondrial disease, but where do we draw the line? Let's say, someday scientist link being left-handed to a gene. Well, it's a right-hand world, so let's fix it. And my family needs more boys, so let's mess with the DNA to make sure I don't have any girls. And then we look at places like China with their one child policy and we see where this dystopia is heading. 

Egg donation: Directive 40:

Heterologous fertilization (that is, any technique used to achieve conception by the use of gametes coming from at least one donor other than the spouses) is prohibited because it is contrary to the covenant of marriage, the unity of the spouses, and the dignity proper to parents and the child.

It's a form of infidelity to use someone other than your spouse to have kids. It degrades the other person by using their gametes as a tool. It's degrading to the child who does not have the opportunity to be raised by their biological parent.

Sometimes it seems as if we forget that children are human beings. They are not commodities. They are not the property of their parents. No one has the right to have a child at all costs. Children are human beings. They are gifts from God made in His image with incalculable dignity. We have the responsibility to raise them, shelter them, feed them, and keep them free from diseases. Yes, it is our moral imperative to keep our child healthy, but not to the expense of others.

A World Without Health Insurance?

A South Portland doctor is joining a growing community of doctors who refuse to deal with the insurance companies any longer. He refuses all insurance, posting his prices for services online, and working with patients on an individual basis if they have a problem paying. He's lost some patients who are very dependent on their insurance to pay their bills, but most of his patients have been understanding.

In this world where health insurance is too often synonymous with healthcare, this is scary. People without insurance don't get care until it's too late. Those who do have insurance often have to weigh in the question, "what will my insurance cover and how much?" when making healthcare decisions. The Catholic Church holds that basic healthcare is a right. Not a privilege or a benefit, a right.

This question of insurance, however, brings into play a much misunderstood, ignored and abused Catholic concept called "subsidiarity." Catholics will often treat this concept as it supports or condemns their individual political views. What does it actually mean and how important is it?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this to say about "subsidiarity":

1882 Certain societies, such as the family and the state, correspond more directly to the nature of man; they are necessary to him. To promote the participation of the greatest number in the life of a society, the creation of voluntary associations and institutions must be encouraged "on both national and international levels, which relate to economic and social goals, to cultural and recreational activities, to sport, to various professions, and to political affairs." This "socialization" also expresses the natural tendency for human beings to associate with one another for the sake of attaining objectives that exceed individual capacities. It develops the qualities of the person, especially the sense of initiative and responsibility, and helps guarantee his rights.
1883 Socialization also presents dangers. Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which "a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co- ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good."

Basically, it means that problems are best handled by those closest to the problem. The government oversteps its bounds when it tries to micromanage. When it was originally introduced by Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, it was meant as a middle ground between communism and unbridled capitalism.

The foundation of all Catholic thought is the inherent dignity of the human person. From that flows pretty much everything the Church teaches. So, as humanity is the most important of God's creation and all people are created, beloved, and redeemed by God, human organizations are supposed to work for the good of people, not for the almighty dollar or someone's ego.

What does this have to do with health insurance? Insurance companies and money have too much control over people's health. The most foundational right that a person has is the right to life. If they get subpar health care, that undermines their right to life.

As long as this doctor in South Portland and others like him are truly flexible with those who cannot pay, their decision to no longer take insurance is a laudable one. He has shown in the article how cutting out the middle man dropped the prices of some of his most basic services like simple routine office visits. If this is true and can be replicated without completely destroying our economy, maybe his decision should be imitated.

A Catholic social teaching equal to and intimately related to "subsidiarity" is "solidarity." We need to do what we can to help those in poverty. If taking insurance out of the equation ultimately leads to more poor people getting the help they need, I'm cool with it.

"Subsidiarity" was introduced as a middle way between two extremes, neither of which are truly in line with the dignity of the human person. I would also say that "subsidiarity" itself should not be taken to an extreme. We cannot completely eliminate the all of the bigger organizations or make them completely impotent because that could lead to chaos which also does not serve the good of humanity.

For more information, here is a very informative article on Catholic Culture.org.

Music Soothes the Baby's Soul

When I saw this article the other day, I wasn't that terribly surprised. James seemed to like music well before he was born. Even now, especially in the car, he'll get upset if there isn't some kind of music playing.

Picture from the article because that baby is too cute.

The article mentions two benefits to the music that I think are worth noting.

1. Music reminds the baby of the womb. Before he or she was born, all sounds were muted and blurry. It was like listening underwater. Music and some nature sounds (like whales) is the closest we can come to imitating those sounds. And I wonder how long this memory lasts. I know of adults that prefer to sleep in a dark room with music playing softly. It's food for thought.
2. It is used as a bonding experience for the parent and child. The parent, seeing such a small person hooked up to all sorts of machines and monitors, is understandably nervous about touching their own child. Then they feel bad about it, because they're not touching their own child. This gives parents a chance to relieve that tension by giving them a chance to comfort their child without touch.

For the Christian parent, this can take on an added dimension. As St Augustine wrote, "He who sings prays twice." We are told in Scripture to,

And do not get drunk on wine, in which lies debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another [in] psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and playing to the Lord in your hearts, giving thanks always and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father.- Ephesians 5:18-20

Being born so early and living to see another day, the parents already have plenty to sing about, "Sing praise to him, play music; proclaim all his wondrous deeds!" (Psalm 105:2) And the child doesn't care what you sound like, they only care to hear mom and dad's voices because those were the sounds they heard the most in the womb.

So this study shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, but it should be a reminder to everyone of the importance of music in the baby's life.

Note to reader: Sorry I haven't written much lately. My internship has really heated up and I was finishing work on a website I'm helping start. The website is called YOUCATholic.com and as the name suggests, it is using the YOUCAT to teach the faith. It should be going on line today and I encourage you to check it out.

10-Year-Old Needs Lung

In Philadelphia, there is a 10-year-old girl who has been waiting for 18 months for a lung due to some regulations in regards to the donor list. She will die soon if she does not get a transplant.

To quote the entire article (it isn't really long):

A Philadelphia-area family's fight over the rules that govern lung transplants is getting national attention.

Ten-year-old Sarah Murnaghan, of Newtown Square, is dying of cystic fibrosis at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

She needs a lung transplant to survive, but Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policies say children under age 12 should receive lungs from another child, not an adult. That means it will take longer for lungs to be available to Sarah, who has been on the transplant list for 18 months.

The case has garnered attention in the Philadelphia region and across the country, and spurred discussion about the lung-transplant regulations.

Her family has started a petition on Change.org, asking supporters to urge the Department of Health and Human Services to change the regulations.

"This policy needs to change," the petition says. "The OPTN/UNOS Lung Review Board, a national group of transplant physicians and surgeons, can make an exceptional ruling for Sarah. And they can recommend new policies to OPTN."

As of this morning, more than 72,000 people had signed the petition. The OPTN said in a statement this week it can't change its rules based on one patient.

National news outlets from CNN to Fox News have picked up on the story, and some doctors not involved in Sarah's case say the policy should change.

Dr. Devang Doshi, a pediatric lung specialist at Beaumont Children's Hospital in Michigan, told ABC News that such "hurdles and obstacles" lead him to "get frustrated with the system."

He said: "It's a very disheartening thing to hear and read about because you've got a child in desperate need of a transplant to survive ... and people less qualified in terms of severity are able to get that organ instead of this child because of what's in place."

Art Caplan, a bioethicist at New York University's Langone Medical Center, told the television station that children should be given priority over adults, because kids can have more healthy years with the new lungs.

Caplan elaborated to NBC News that children should get priority in part because many adult transplant patients need new lungs because of their own actions, like smoking, while children are "non-culpable." 

"I think we should go back and revisit the system and I think we should give more weight to kids," Caplan told NBC.

Sarah's family has said she has only a few weeks to live and needs a ventilator to breathe.

I'm in complete agreement that the guidelines need to be revisited. They seem awfully unfair to children in need of lungs. There are simply not many children donors. Some parents who lose children see donating the body as an honorable thing so that other parents don't have to experience the same loss. But, other parents see it very differently. Their child had been taken from them and they can't bear the thought of their child being cut up. Both of these ideas are natural. Neither set of parents should feel ashamed of their feelings.

On the other hand, while I think "need" is a good qualifier, I think that "age" and "personal culpability" could be a slippery slope. So, is a 40-year-old life worth less than a 10-year-old life simply due to age? Is a skinny person more valuable than a fat person simply because they don't overeat? Yes, age and culpability can and should be considered as factors, but they can't be the final deal-maker or breaker. A skinny, young life is not by default more valuable than a fat, old life.

Life is life and God loves us all. Each and every life has unimaginable dignity and value. I don't envy the people who have to make these decisions about organ transplants. Their job must be horrible.

Sick kids shouldn't die because parents don't want to donate their dead kid's organs. From what I've seen, there is no reason why she can't get an adult lung. At the very least, I'd think an adult lung would be better than no lung at all. If she's within weeks of death's door, by all means, change the regulations and get her a lung now.

Sign the petition here: http://www.change.org/savesarah

Update
Update again

Born to Save Her Sister's Life: The Morality of Saving Lives

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Last week, Marissa Ayala graduated college. She was conceived by her parents 20 years ago in the hopes that she could be a bone marrow donor for her 16-year-old sister who was dying of cancer.

Ethically and pastorally, this case would be a nightmare. You are dealing with a family who is looking at the very real possibility that they will be losing their daughter. They are watching her waste away. They have been unable to find a donor. In one last act of desperation, they try to make a donor themselves.

Of course, baby Marissa would not have been able to agree to the procedure. A bone marrow transplant can be a dangerous and painful procedure. I don't know exactly how they harvested the marrow, so I can't make any specific comments in that regard. There are about 3 or 4 ways that this procedure could have been done.

My third favorite book, after the Bible and the Catechism, is surprisingly unhelpful in this particular case.

I LOVE THIS BOOK.

The guidelines it gives for one person donating to another include: there needs to be a serious need on the part of the recipient that cannot be fulfilled any other way, the functional integrity of the donor cannot be compromised, the risk taken needs to be proportionate to the good result, and the donor and recipient needs to give free and informed consent. (pg. 106)

In this instance, the donor cannot give free and informed consent, the parents are given that responsibility. Arguably, their consent is not free at all, being weighed heavily by their concern for both the donor and the recipient. The need of the 16-year-old was clearly grave. While the donor must've gone through some pain, her functional integrity was only maybe temporarily compromised. The risk to the younger daughter was certainly proportionate to saving her older sister's life.

I don't know if this family went to any clergy in making their decision. If they did, God bless that clergy-member. If faced with a situation like this, I would only be able to help the family explore their options and help them to look at the situation thoroughly from multiple points of view. I would help them understand all of the implications of their actions and pray that the Holy Spirit guides them.

Yes, it is not right to use a person. But, a decision like this cannot be easy. The letter of the law is one thing. When the rubber hits the road, when Truth meets everyday human experience, that is when things get hard.

7 Quick Takes (#8) Cool News Edition

--- 1 ---

This is a couple days late because I was traveling this weekend. I've left MO where I've been for the past month visiting friends and family to go back to NY. I'm homesick already. Anything to cheer me up. :(

--- 2 ---

 

This momma braved the tornado that hit Moore, OK while in the hospital, in full-blown labor. 

--- 3 ---

 

This baby was saved by a 3-D printer. Ain't modern medicine cool?

--- 4 ---

 

Say it with me: Awwwwwwww... This guy made an engagement ring that could light up whenever he was near her. 

--- 5 ---

 

I know it isn't very Christ-like of me, but I can't help feeling good about this. The founder of Girls Gone Wild was convicted for false imprisonment and assault. He is exposed once again as the piece of work that he is. I hope he someday realizes how completely immoral it is to take advantage of drunk women to make a buck. 

--- 6 ---

 

Maybe we can learn a few things from Japan about how to treat mothers in the workforce.

--- 7 ---

 

I think we could all learn a thing or two from this woman. She didn't look in a mirror for a year, including her own wedding day. In our culture which is so obsessed with looking good, I think we could all benefit from covering a few mirrors.

 

For more Quick Takes, visit Conversion Diary!

7 Quick Takes (#7) Warrior Momma Edition

--- 1 ---

There ain't nothing ugly about this picture. (Pardon the language though.)

Source: This awesome site called "How to be a dad"

--- 2 ---

 

This momma gave a part of her liver to her baby who couldn't wait any longer for a donor.

--- 3 ---

 

Women like Stacie Crimm, the mother of this little girl, who gave up cancer treatment for their unborn babies.



--- 4 ---

 

Of course, I'd need to mention the mothers who have scars across their guts and sometimes even deeper scars on their souls from births that went wrong. We've had a long, hard road to travel in recovering from our children's births. 

--- 5 --

 

A couple months ago, there was a tragedy in my neck of the woods. A man carjacked and kidnapped a mother and daughter. He tied up the mother and raped the daughter. The mother escaped and got the man's attention so the daughter could run away. The mother was murdered. The daughter is safe. The man is in prison, apparently having a hard time.

 

The mother clearly sacrificed herself for her child. She had the courage to sacrifice herself in such a horrendous situation so that her daughter could live. It's almost insulting to call her only a "warrior." She is clearly much more than that.

 

--- 6 ---

 

Doctors gave up this baby for dead, but this warrior momma gave her daughter skin to skin contact and within minutes her heart rate became normal and she was breathing on her own. All this mother wanted to do was to make sure "she didn't die being cold," but she ended up saving her life.

 



--- 7 ---

Source

 

And a talk about warrior mothers cannot be complete without birthmoms! These are the women who held on to their babies for 40 weeks, gave birth to them, and then gave them up for adoption. These women are no less mothers than the women who raised them. They did what all mothers have to do, sacrifice themselves for their babies.

 



For more Quick Takes, visit Conversion Diary!

Surprising Facts about Breast Feeding in Africa

When I got pregnant with James, my husband asked me if I was going to breast-feed. I didn't know how to answer. All the children in my family were formula-fed. I guess I just kinda assumed I'd formula-feed too. That's when my husband informed me that we were going to breast-feed because that's how a lot of our conversations go. Ask question then give order. If you're reading this: I love ya, babe.

Like the author of this article, I thought that breast-feeding would be a no-brainer in third-world countries. Heck, money is one of the main reasons why I agreed to breast-feed here in the US. So, I was surprised when I read that 1.4 million babies are dying annually because of poor education in regards to breast-feeding.

In some countries, women are waiting for breast-milk to mature before giving it to their babies, denying them the health benefits of the colostrum. In their defense, the colostrum does look nasty and it doesn't look like it would do the baby any good, but it's actually very important for the baby's health. They even said in my breast-feeding class that if your baby gets nothing else, try to make sure your baby gets the colostrum. Some breast-feeding is better than no breast-feeding at all.

One of the things that struck me the most though was the practice of giving the baby a mixture made from water and ink from a Koran verse for protection. Well, my Bible says too, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God." (Matthew 4:4, Deuteronomy 8:3) Apparently, however, the Koran specifically states that you are supposed to breast-feed for the
first two years.

I can understand the importance of tradition. I'm sure some of these women in the third-world would find it odd that I had a priest pour water over my infant's head. I have to applaud UNICEF for aggressively trying to solve this problem. As the article said:

There are babies suffering and dying because they don’t get enough to eat, yet the best nutrition for them is inches away at all times.  

Really sobering when you think about it.

Unrealistic Views about Death

I read an interesting op-ed from the Washington Post yesterday. It was written by a doctor talking about our unrealistic view of death.

In part, she bought into Elizabeth Kubler-Ross' myth that there once was a day when we weren't afraid of death, a day that never existed. But overall, I think that her words are well worth noting:

For all its technological sophistication and hefty price tag, modern medicine may be doing more to complicate the end of life than to prolong or improve it.

Amen.

Sequestering our elderly keeps most of us from knowing what it’s like to grow old.

This physical and emotional distance becomes obvious as we make decisions that accompany life’s end. Suffering is like a fire: Those who sit closest feel the most heat; a picture of a fire gives off no warmth. That’s why it’s typically the son or daughter who has been physically closest to an elderly parent’s pain who is the most willing to let go.

I have long noted how we seem to move our dying out into the nursing homes on the edge of town. I like her analogy, that "suffering is like a flame." Looking back at my years working in the nursing homes, I see how the family who had visited the resident every week are more willing to let go than the family that is flying in to make the final decisions. We cannot let our own fear of death cloud our judgment in caring for our dying loved ones. Even the Church says there is a time when people can be let go.

Directive 57 of the Ethical Directives for Catholic Health Care states:

A person may forgo extraordinary or disproportionate means of preserving life. Disproportionate means are those that in the patient's judgment do not offer a reasonable hope of benefit or entail an excessive burden, or impose excessive expense on the family or the community.

And you cannot make blanket statements in regards to what constitutes extraordinary treatment. An example used in my ethics class once: A dying woman is ballooning up and her skin is cracked and weeping because her body no longer processes fluids correctly. In a case like that, it is not unreasonable to forego IV fluids.

Death is inevitable. Doctors can do a lot to postpone it, but they cannot prevent it. Sometimes it's just time to let someone go.

  

Kermit Gosnell: Why Aren't Both Sides Angry?

Yesterday, we heard the closing arguments of the Kermit Gosnell trial. If you've never heard of him, you're not alone as the mainstream media hasn't talked about it very much in a long time. I will not go into the absolutely disgusting details, plenty of other pro-lifers have done that. It suffices to say he is charged with several counts of infanticide for killing children born alive after botched abortions and one count of gross negligence leading to the death of a woman who went to him for a late-term abortion. He is facing a civil suit for second case of deadly negligence. His facilities were completely unsanitary. He had a clean waiting room for the rich white women who went to him and a dirty one for the poor women with darker skin.

Now, I know exactly why my side of the debate is angry with this man. Not only is he an abortionist, but he killed babies born alive. It is the other side that puzzles me. Except for some solitary voices, I'm not hearing much from them. There are several reasons why they should be just as angry as the pro-lifers:

1. He gives them all a bad name.  Most people want abortion to be safe, legal and rare. These abortions were not legal and they certainly were not safe. He needs to go to jail.
2. He hurt the very women he claimed to help. He is facing criminal charges for tearing a woman up inside which lead to her death. The civil suit is about a woman who was victim to an overdose because he regularly had unqualified people handling the anesthesia and the pain meds.
3. He wasn't killing "fetuses," he was killing babies.
4. He did all of this to earn a buck off impoverished women. See below:

Yes, this case exposes the complexity of the abortion issue. As a pro-choice blogger noted, "It is vastly important that most of his patients were poor people of color, that they were already in impoverished circumstances and that an unintended pregnancy, for many of them, meant losing their job, their housing, their social safety net." As I have said before, a woman should never have to choose between a child and a job, an education or anything else. I do not believe that the answer is killing more unborn children. The answer is protecting and supporting pregnant women and single moms.

The Old Order Has Passed Away: Reflection of the Fifth Sunday of Easter

He will wipe every tear from their eyes, and there shall be no more death or mourning, wailing or pain, for the old order has passed away. -Revelation 21:4

A major component of my internship with Spiritual Care at the hospital was to have some kind of ritual to "enter in with the patient and their family." I had a hard time coming up with one. For one thing, I was in the ER so sometimes I didn't really have much time between visits and I definitely had no privacy to have a ritual. For another, except for things like the Rosary, I really didn't have a prayer life. The Rosary, even just a decade, was too long for a pre-pastoral visit ritual. Usually, I was lucky just to remind myself of the patient's name and what their presenting condition was.

About halfway through the semester, after being asked a half dozen times to get a ritual, I settled upon memorizing Bible passages. Every evening I'd pack an index card on which I'd have a passage written and between visits I'd work on memorization. This quote from Revelation, found in the second reading this week, was one of the quotes I used.

Source

Someday all of this is going to end. The mother mourning her dead child will hold that child again in God's kingdom. The person with the debilitating, fatal illness will finally feel healthy and whole again. The person born with a severe mental disability will be able to sit down and chat with you. Whatever is bothering you will finally be resolved.

While I wouldn't necessarily share this quote in a pastoral visit, it does give me comfort when I see so much suffering in the world. The person you're visiting might not be able to see that far into the future. Caught up in their pain, they just want their lives to go back to normal now. They don't care about some future world, they want relief now. I think we've all been there. As a part of the staff, I have more of an outsider view. From the outside, it's easier to take the longer view. It's easier to remember as I'm driving home that this is not forever.

This too shall end.

The old order. The society in which disease runs rampant. In which people go broke paying medical bills. In which uninsured can't get care until it's too late. In which car accidents happen. In which people shoot one another. This old order will pass away. Then God Himself will wipe the tears from all of our eyes and we will no longer suffer.

And in the meantime, we got cat pictures!

3 Christian Images for the Boston Marathon Bombings + 1

Anyone who has read this blog for very long knows that I think long and hard before I say anything about major news stories. I decided to cover this story using the same concept I used with the Newtown shooting, but I had a much harder time coming up with images. I could see the faults in every image that came to mind. So, please, know that I do not intend to be offensive in any of these.

1. The Good Samaritan

Speaking as someone who watched it all unfold on the news, I was among those struck by the sheer number of people who ran toward the blasts instead of away. By now, we've all seen those iconic photographs of people pushing wheelchairs and caring for the injured. One of the things that touched me most was the stories of runners running to the hospital to give blood. I think the longest I've ever run in my life was a mile. I can't imagine how tired these people were, but they literally went the extra mile and gave a pint of their own blood.

2. Paul's Running Metaphor 1 Corinthians 9:24-27

There are runners and spectators that are not going to walk, much less run, again due to injuries. Amputees and others are looking at long, hard therapy to return their lives to some semblance of normal. They need our prayers to support them through all of the work they have to do. They, in turn, will serve as an inspiration for those who watch them fight against the odds. They will truly be embodying the kind of discipline that Paul describes in this post. The last thing any of them need to be worrying about is the massive medical bills that will be coming from this. You can donate here.

3. "I have competed well; I have finished the race; I have kept the faith" 2 Timothy 4:7 

There were three fatalities. All three were way too young to die, especially the 8-year-old. He had just had his First Communion. Our prayers are also with them and their families. I really have nothing else to say.

 

+ 1 "Indeed, the word of God is living and effective, sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating even between soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and able to discern reflections and thoughts of the heart." Hebrew 4:12

 I saw on a number of news outlets the dead Boston bombing suspect said that the Bible was a "cheap copy of the Koran" and that it was used to justify the US invading the Middle East. It is very disrespectful to say disparaging remarks about another faith's holy book. The Bible is very important to me and to many other people in the United States, just like the Koran was important to him. We need to stop attacking one another's faith. (That also goes for the idiots who burned a copy of the Koran and who said the Koran should be flushed!)

Response to "Outlawing Abortion Won't Help Children With Down Syndrome"

There are never simple answers to complex problems.

Source

About a month ago, North Dakota became the first state to outlaw abortion due to genetic abnormalities including Down Syndrome. Of course, this has been widely praised by pro-lifers and widely condemned by pro-choicers. On April 1st, an opinion article about it appeared in the New York Times. Written by a pro-choice mother of a child with DS, she expresses deep sympathy for the women who abort their children to spare them a life in a world which is "difficult...for people with disabilities."

I can sympathize with these women as well, but continuing to allow abortions is not the answer either. She rightly points out that society needs to treat the disabled better. They need to have better housing for the adults, better health care and early intervention for the children. We need to protect better those with intellectual disabilities from abuse, sexual, physical, emotional, and financial. Caring for "the least of these" (Matthew 25:40 and 45) should take priority over setting money aside for lawyers to CYOA.

Keep your priorities straight, people!

North Dakota can't stop there. There is the obvious reality that this law is completely unenforceable. It's great to have it on record that disabled people are human beings, that their lives are valuable and they are loved and respected. But you need to go beyond that. So, women can't abort them unborn, we need to treat the ones that are born better. We need to educate pregnant women about the realities of DS instead of letting the myths reign. We need to let them know they are supported. This law needs to be a first step toward treating the disabled like the valuable members of the human family that they are.

Otherwise, you are just putting a Band-Aid on a great injustice. You're just giving lip service to the rights of the disabled without actually doing anything to help them.

North Dakota has made a good first step. They are demonstrating that their heart is in the right place. They need to go all the way if they hope to reverse the trend. Keeping it legal will only support the status quo, but making it illegal isn't enough to change the status quo.