Dr. Kevin Hay analyses Canada’s plans for Euthanasia.
Can Human Rights Exist Without God?
During a recent discussion, I was embarrassed to discover that I could not prove that Human Rights are Inherent and Immutable. Worse: I couldn’t even show that we have Human Rights! An argument against Homo Sapiens having unique ‘Rights’ arises from the probability that we are not the only advanced species in the Universe.
There may be billions of sentient life forms— so, why would humanity have special Rights? (“There are up to 19,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars similar to ours with at least one planet similar to Earth.”) The good news is that ‘Faster Than Light’ travel is highly improbable, so alien rights are moot!
After mulling on the Human Rights conundrum without finding a satisfactory answer, I took to Netflix for distraction! Curiously, the final episode of “Afterlife,” gave glimmers of insight. Afterlife was written, produced, and directed by atheist and comedian, Ricky Gervais. He also plays the main character of Tony Johnson, who is suicidally depressed after the death of his wife from cancer. For most of the series Tony is consistently horrible to people and considers this to be his ‘super-power’!
[SPOILER ALERT!] In the final episode, after watching pre-recorded messages from his wife, Tony comes to the realisation that his ‘superpower’ is being kind to other people. He even manages to tell the odd white lie to protect the feelings of others, rather than lambasting them with his usual brutal honesty! The clip below is of Tony, a reporter for the local paper, interviewing children with cancer.
Gervais paints a beautiful image of life, love, death, and reconciliation. He gives us his view of an afterlife, a ‘supernatural state.’ Religions obviously focus on ‘God’ and supernatural states first. Only secondly, do Religions show us how to live a good life. Christ gave the simplest instructions of all: Love your God and Love your Neighbour.
Gervais may be light on the God bit, but he seems to be doing well on the “Love your neighbour” part.
The misnomer of ‘Human Rights’
Humans are happiest when caring for others: our families, then friends, community, and extended affiliations / humanity.
A weakness in atheism and secular societies is the abandonment of guides like the Holy Bible, the Torah, the Koran, etc. Humanity came precipitously close to self-destruction during WWII, so we developed an alternative moral roadmap: the UN Declaration of Human Rights, 1948. Some countries have similar documents, including the Magna Carta Liberatum (the Great Charter of Freedoms) in England, 1215 A.D.; the Declaration of Independence in the US, 1776; and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada, 1982.
These Declarations and Charters define ‘Human Rights,’ but they are much better perceived to be our Responsibilities to fellow human beings. Responsibilities show us how to start loving our neighbour.
This was poignantly said by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:
“We hear a constant clamor for rights, rights, always rights, but so very little about responsibility. And we have forgotten God. The need now is for selflessness, for a spirit of sacrifice, for a willingness to put aside personal gains for the salvation of the whole Western world.”
Are human responsibilities immutable?
Quick answer: Yes!
This answer is from a Moral Absolutist position, which brings us to certain definitions:
Moral Absolutism: “Moral Absolutism is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act.” (As in something is either “Right” or “Wrong.”)
Moral Relativism: “the doctrine that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute.” (As in, this is ‘My’ Truth.)
Post-Modernism (abbreviated from Wikipedia): An intellectual stance defined by opposition to epistemic certainty and the stability of meaning. Post-Modernism dismisses objective facts as naive realism and is characterized by self-referentiality, epistemological, moral relativism, pluralism, irony, irreverence, and eclecticism; rejects the ‘‘universal validity’’ of binary oppositions, stable identity, hierarchy, andcategorization. (As in “Nothing is a fact.”)
The legal definitions we use for Human Rights and Responsibilities are limited by our capacity to conceptualize such intangibles, and our ability to explain them through language.
Relativists will claim that Rights and Responsibilities are not inherent or immutable, because they ‘are granted by others’ (e.g. by governments.) They claim that Rights and Responsibilities can vary according to the situation: indeed, they can be denied, but they cannot be nullified.
Our responsibilities to others do not vary particularly unless there is a major overriding reason, such as the need for self-defense when dealing with a violent person. Typically, what varies is our attentiveness to the task.
Moral Absolutism and Double Effect
Mainstream religions hold positions towards Moral Absolutism. Some have accused the Catholic Church of changing what it deems to be ‘moral’ at times.
This can arise when a situation is analyzed using the principles of Double Effect. There are four criteria and all four must be fulfilled for an action to be considered moral.
The aim of the action must be good, or at least morally neutral.
The good effect must come directly from the good action.
The evil effect must not be desired but only permitted (and so long there is no other reasonable choice.)
There must be a sufficiently grave reason for permitting the evil effect to occur.
This means that one may NOT act immorally even for a good outcome (e.g., one cannot intentionally kill an innocent person to save other lives.)
Applying Double Effect to Abortion, shows its immorality in every clause:
1. The aim of an abortion is the death of an innocent human being (so is not good, nor neutral.)
2. All ‘good effects’ arise from the deliberate killing of an innocent person, so they do not come from a ‘good action’.
3. There are reasonable alternatives (e.g., adoption) and the evil effect — the death of the child — is the desired outcome.
4. The mother’s circumstances cannot be so grave as to outweigh the killing of an innocent human being.
Pro-Aborts always bring up the issue of treating some serious illness in a pregnant woman. Using Double Effect, it appears to be moral to fully treat a seriously ill pregnant woman, even if the treatment might lead to the death of her child, so long as there is no otherreasonable treatment choice and that outcome is an indirect and unwanted consequence of the treatment.
The optimism of Christianity
Relativism seems more “user-friendly” than Moral Absolutism because its believers can rationalize most every situation to suit themselves! (“self-referentiality.”) This can lead to the complete abrogation of all personal responsibility — little wonder it is so popular.
Post-Modernism is an easy philosophy to ascribe to, but it seems pitifully negative. Imagine believing that nothing has innate value, consistency, or validity…ever. So depressing. It must be hard for an Atheist or Humanist to maintain a consistently moral stance through times of doubt. Religions support us through dark times and give us hope and a sense of continuity into an afterlife. Catholic ideas of redemption and forgiveness are wonderfully reassuring.
It is clear why dictators repress Religion. If Pol Pot and his followers had any sense of love of their neighbour, Cambodia might have avoided the Killing Fields. We do not have to look far to see worrisome examples today.
The Bible encapsulates all of this in just one sentence:
‘But the greatest of these is love…’
-
Bastille Day is a commemoration of the Genocide of French Catholics, such as the brave people of the Vendee https://t.co/TxxfgEsuwd -
The General Synod of the Church of England has voted against supporting Assisted Suicide, choosing instead to reaff… https://t.co/F5PbBm1dN3
-
Pope Francis has said that US President Joe Biden is 'incoherent' on abortion and should speak to his pastor. https://t.co/9RCIHO7ymx
-
'A group in the centre near the altar sang hymns during the Mass…The whole ceremony was intently watched by soldier… https://t.co/0C2VIzjneB
Are 'Catholic' Politicians More Moral?
Are Catholic Politicians more moral than the average politician?
I was surprised to learn from a recent Catholic Arena article that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, had converted to Catholicism. I do not agree with Blair’s politics, but wish him well as a brother-in-Christ and pray that he has made peace with his decision to join the 2003 Iraq War.
Politicians are strange animals: they should be classified under Mammalia but many people rate them as Reptilia. An IPSOS 2019 survey looked at the public’s view of the trustworthiness of many professions world-wide. Politicians consistently scored badly.
Catholicus Politicus
The Blair article got me pondering on a particular species of politician: “Catholicus Politicus” — the Catholic Politician! Are Catholic Politicians more moral than the average politician? Sadly, the current Catholic politicians who immediately come to mind are zealots in their support of abortion: the President of the US, Joe Biden; Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau; the President of France, Emmanuel Macron and the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, third-in-line for POTUS in an emergency.
Some suggest that Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the UK, is a ‘bad’ Catholic politician. Boris may be a hypocrite — drinking wine on a patio with co-workers while enforcing the lockdown on others — but as a miscreant he does not seem to rank in the ‘Premier League’ of offenders! (Boris was baptised Catholic; confirmed in the Church of England and is now on his third marriage, recently wed in Westminster Cathedral) With remarkable self-awareness, he noted: “Christianity is a superb ethical system and I would count myself as a kind of very, very bad Christian”.
I previously wrote about ‘devout’ Joe Biden receiving Communion, despite his zealotry for abortion.
Sinners, Penitents and the Holy Eucharist — Catholic Arena
When asked about a ‘good’ Catholic politician, most think of JFK. Kennedy was the first Catholic American President — 60 years ago. Kennedy advanced Civil Rights in America and started the Peace Corps but authorised the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba (planned by Eisenhower) and was the president to send the first Special Forces / a.k.a. “military advisors” into Vietnam in 1961. Add to this, we may never know the true story of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
In formerly Catholic countries (like Ireland) political parties often have many members who are nominally ‘catholic.’ Catholic voters should watch for the politicians who have sold their souls for votes or position.
Political Manifesto
Before the last US election, Pope Francis gave beautifully simple advice which can be applied to most any candidate.
“Study the proposals well, pray and choose in conscience.”
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops [USCCB] gave detailed guidance on selecting a candidate with an informed conscience. They produced a 53-page document “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” which is unfortunately long, though in particular the second section can help Catholic voters in any country. The USCCB topics are grouped under the headings of:
HUMAN LIFE.
PROMOTING PEACE.
MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE.
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
PREFERENTIAL OPTIONS FOR THE POOR AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE.
HEALTH CARE. MIGRATION.
CATHOLIC EDUCATION.
PROMOTING JUSTICE AND COUNTERING VIOLENCE.
COMBAT UNJUST DISCRIMINATION.
CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME.
COMMUNICATIONS, MEDIA; CULTURE.
GLOBAL SOLIDARITY.
(Individual topics are summarised in the Appendix.)
Discussion
If need be, please reference the additional material from the USCCB.
Beware of seemingly ‘benevolent’ summaries provided by others! I found one summary of the USCCB document from an anonymous group of “theological authors and lay Catholic ministers, to help spread the bishop’s document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. They provided a review of Biden and Trump’s platforms and though the authors mention that each issue does not have equal moral weighting, they ascribed 1 point for each of the 47 topics they had selected from the USCCB, as “Aligns” with the Catholic Church or “Does Not Align” for each candidate. (Other categories included “Inconclusive” or “Changed.”) Their tally was overly simplistic and biased in favour of Joe Biden. (Such as Biden’s support for 600,000+ abortions per annum being considered equivalent to Trump’s support of the Death Penalty: 22 death penalties were imposed in 2019.)
There were other issues. Biden got 5 “Aligns” points in the section on Migration. As president he halted construction of the wall on the southern US border, which allowed a major increase in illegal immigration. Many support him doing so, but it has increased the smuggling — and possibly the trafficking — of children. Also, 30 to 80% of the women who cross the border illegally are raped en route and many men and women are drafted into being drug mules because they cannot afford the $5,000-12,000 fee charged by the coyotes.
The anonymous group also gave Biden points under “Catholic Education” though he scorns the Church’s teaching on abortion: Yowzer!
Any list has weaknesses, the bishops said nothing about the life-saving benefits of Oil and Gas through heating, transportation, medication, etc. They only indirectly mentioned the damage to our natural resources when providing “Clean-Energy sources.” (e.g., a two-megawatt windmill uses 260 tons of steel from 300 tons of iron-ore and 170 tons of coking coal.)
Political Classification
I classify Catholic politicians into 3 groups:
1. Those who support Catholic values (often supporting Human Rights)
2. Those who take a (cowardly) “neutral” stance
3. Nominal Catholics whose policies conflict with Catholic teachings and often conflict with basic human rights.
Maybe we should classify ourselves first, before we classify the politicians! We need to answer honestly: do we promote Catholic values at the ballot-box? Generally, we get the politicians we deserve. Please vote wisely, where and whenever your next election may be!
APPENDIX of USCCB topics for an informed conscience:
HUMAN LIFE:
Abortion
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
Cloning and destruction of Human Embryos
Genocide
Torture
Direct and intentional targeting of noncombatants in war or terrorist attacks
Misuse of Biotechnology and Human Experimentation
The Death Penalty
PROMOTING PEACE:
Avoid War and the promotion of Peace
Rejection of Torture
Avoid the preventative use of Military Force
Reverse the spread of Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Weapons
Reallocation of resources to the urgent needs of the poor
MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE:
Support a definition of marriage which recognizes and protects the lifelong commitment between a man and a woman (some references to GENDER issues)
Opposition to unjust discrimination against those who experience & ‘‘deep-seated homosexual tendencies’’ who ‘‘must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity’’
Valuing, protecting, and the nurturing of children
Family-supportive tax code, divorce laws, immigration and welfare policies
Just wages
Protection of children (with the right to grow up with a father & mother)
Opposition to contraceptive / abortion mandates in public health programs
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM:
Promotion of Religious Liberty (referencing persecutions in other countries)
PREFERENTIAL OPTIONS FOR THE POOR AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE:
Jobs for all who can work
Just wages
Removing barriers to equal pay & employment for women
Overcoming discrimination
Right of workers to organize (Join a union /collective bargaining)
Economic freedom, initiative and right to own private property
The reduction of social and economic inequalities
Legislation against exploitative interest rates.
Welfare policy reducing poverty and avoiding family breakdown
Welfare safety net: Income Tax & Child Tax Credits
Support of Faith Based Groups which work to support communities.
Social Security protections
Commitment to Affordable Housing (also supported by religious groups)
Agriculture Policy and Food Security for all
Sustainable agriculture / stewardship
HEALTH CARE:
Affordable and accessible Health Care
Strengthen Medicare & Medicaid
Compassionate care for HIV/AIDS and addictions
MIGRATION:
Care for ALL newcomers (authorized and unauthorized)
Comprehensive immigration reform
Broad and Fair legalization program; a path to Citizenship
Work program with just wages
Family reunification policies
Access to legal protections including Due Process
Refuge/Asylum for those fleeing persecution and violence
Policies to address the root causes of human trafficking (poverty, conflict, judicial breakdown)
Humane and just control of a nation’s borders
Immigrant detention only for public safety (not as deterrence or punishment.)
Special status for trafficked children.
CATHOLIC EDUCATION:
Parental right to choose the education for their children
Government support (tax credits/scholarships) helping parental choices
Moral and character formation consistent with parental beliefs
Quality education, for all
Just salaries and fair benefits for teachers
Equality of programming between public and private/religious schools.
PROMOTING JUSTICE AND COUNTERING VIOLENCE:
Moral responsibility and effective response to violent crime
Criminal Justice System reform (for remediation, rather than punishment)
Reasonable restrictions on access to assault weapons and handguns
Opposing the Death Penalty
COMBAT UNJUST DISCRIMINATION:
Combat any Unjust Discrimination (Race, Religion, Sex, Ethnicity, Disabling Condition, Age.)
Remove barriers to education
Protect voting rights
Good policing
Equal employment for women and minorities.
CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME:
Protection of the land, water and air.
Energy conservation with development of alternative, renewable, and Clean-Energy sources
A call to address Climate Change
US to lead in the development of poorer nations
Address migration from environmental degradation/climate change.
Avoid coercive population control programs.
COMMUNICATIONS, MEDIA; CULTURE:
Promoting responsible regulation of electronic media (respecting freedom of speech yet addressing the
lowered standards which leading to offensive materials)
Support non-commercial religious programming
Limit the concentrated control of the Media
Resist the focus on profit
Support rating systems and parental supervision.
Vigorous enforcement of obscenity and child pornography laws
Improve the blocking technology for parents, schools and libraries.
GLOBAL SOLIDARITY:
Alleviation of Global Poverty and increased development aid
Relief of excessive debt and disease
Equitable trade policies
Promotion of religious liberty and human rights. (Defense of religious minorities around the world.)
Political and financial support for beneficial United Nations programs, other international bodies and international law
Asylum for refugees
Actively address regional conflicts
Specifically provide leadership in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (ensuring security for Israel; a viable state for Palestinians; respect for Lebanon and peace in the region.)
Featured
No Man Left Behind
Eugenics, Euthanasia and Frankenstein Mice
To what extent are decisions on the right to life dictated by emotions rather than logic? Dr. Kevin Hay takes a look.
A Detailed Analysis of Ireland's Dying with Dignity Bill
Ireland’s Dying with Dignity Bill has been passed with little debate over its contents. We analyse them here.