“Frightening”: Vatican supports letting baby die

You know the case, baby Charlie Gard:

From Daniel Payne at the Federalist,

His parents wish to bring him to the United States for a long-shot experimental treatment. The courts object, believing Charlie should be allowed to die “with dignity.” The European Court of Human Rights declined to hear an appeal, effectively sealing the boy’s fate.

But the Catholic Church’s position on the sanctity of life is unmistakable to anyone, and has been for several thousand years. Its stance on the authority of the family has also long been clear. We should assume that the Vatican would be more than happy to condemn and rebuke in no uncertain terms an idiot juridical decision that condemns a little baby boy to die rather than allowing his parents to fight for his once chance to survive.

You would be wrong. The Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life yesterday released a statement that waffles between limp-wristed equivocations and outright willful ignorance of church teaching. If this is where the Vatican now makes its stand, then the most vulnerable members of society—which is to say all of us, at some point—are in trouble. More.

Reality check: First, the European Union owns the child, absent Brexit. Second, the EU is slowly embracing routine euthanasia. Third, it’s revealing what “social justice” really turns out to be. It’s certainly not Aunt Mary Elizabeth’s Vatican any more.

See also: Why female genital mutilation continues in the West

Share
  • H

    Not my Pope ….

  • Dave

    This show exactly why this perticular clown was chosen as the poop, er I mean pope.
    I’m no catholic but if I was, I’d wouldn’t be just because of this complete f*cking idiot and his muslim loving (and baby killing) ways.

  • Clinton

    Late last year Pope Francis summarily dismissed the entire staff of
    the Pope John Paul II Academy for Life, and has since restocked the
    Pontifical Academy with his fellow-travelers– many of whom are
    problematic, indeed. It is no surprise that the Academy’s defense of
    Baby Gard is so worthless, for all the orthodox Catholic voices that
    would have spoken up have been shut out by this Pope.

  • Jabberwokk

    Do not put your faith in princes….or popes for that matter.

  • Waffle

    Sorry to go all biblical on you, but as a secular historian, I suggest reading the bible as history. It’s a fascinating but depressing read. Seems that the Almighty has been displeased with the wickedness of man many times in the past and so used Nature to destroy him. Stories like the Flood and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah come to mind. We are probably overdue.

  • Before everyone explodes, if the current Vatican is guilty of anything it is a series of poorly worded and expressed ideas.

    From this article:

    http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2017/06/29/vaticans_academy_for_life_issues_statement_on_charlie_gard/1322138

    “In a statement, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia,
    president of the Pontifical Academy for Life says the interests of the
    patient must be paramount, but adds “we must also accept the limits of
    medicine and […..] avoid aggressive medical procedures that are
    disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to
    the patient or the family.”

    In short, one is not required to go for extreme measures that will not prolong or better life. It is not advocating active or passive euthanasia.

    Unless I’ve missed something, that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    What bothers me about this case in the UK is that courts have usurped the parents’ wishes and the potential that this treatment may have.

    • Tooth&Claw

      The child is totally dependant on machines for his existence at this point. He has a mitochondrial disease that ‘might’ be helped by an experimental treatment. If his parents want to trot him out as a guinea pig, that’s up to them. If I were them, that would not be my choice. My faith in doctors is limited. Life is a sexually transmitted disease and we all die, and often not in a time of our own choosing

      • I’m sure people thought that way with x-rays and other things we now take for granted.

        Even if the treatment does not work, is it enough for doctors to simply give their medical opinions or do they have to decide for the family, as well?

        • Tooth&Claw

          As I said, it’s the parent’s decision. The doctors can offer their medical opinions, but it’s not their decision to make. The parents and child will live with whatever outcome there is, good or bad.
          For me that goes for any medical treatment. Informed consent is the standard to be met.

          • But they helped the courts make that decision.

            That’s the NHS for you.

          • Tooth&Claw

            Yeah, I don’t understand why the parents had to go to court. It’s ridiculous.

            However the amount of power our own medical care services have is also scary. They can keep you detained in a locked unit, if the doctors deem it necessary and say you’re not mentally competent.

          • What is missing is the individual and worse – the individual devoid of reason.