During the Nuremberg trials doctor after doctor who participated in immoral procedures used as their defense that they were just doing their job. Well then as now there are and were people who thought that those doctors should of stood up and demanded their right to choose what procedures they would do on moral grounds.
Hitler in his dreams of a pure race did not allow at all for free choice. The inmates at the camps certainly weren’t granted it. The doctors according to their own testimony felt they had just as little choice to disobey orders. One of the chargeable actions as listed at #15 in the trial was the following description.
-----quote-----
15. Euthanasia. September 1939 - April 1945. Involved the secret killing of the aged, insane, incurably ill, deformed children, and others, beginning at asylums in Germany and later in the camps and occupied territories. Charged against Blome, Brack, K. Brandt, and Hoven. Blome was acquitted; Brack, K. Brandt, and Hoven were convicted.
---------------
It seemed obvious that the above included all sorts of people that Hitler thought unwanted. Another thought, how else would you classify the aborted baby? I know illegitimate and inconvenient are thrown around but they are just adjectives for unwanted.
In the aftermath of the World War II, the Catholic Church was taken to task by those zealous to portray the Church as corrupt and only looking out for itself. Why they ask didn’t the Church stand up and try harder to do more to save the Jews from Genocide?
Well the church has learned its lesson and has been fighting what it considers immoral. They are ideologically opposed to abortion. Now they are doing what they can against abortion. They are talking of losing one of their biggest money makers. For this, the same critics seem to think that they are wrong. Even go so far as calling them immoral. Someone needs to check their spell checker for the work hypocricy.
I would of thought that the liberals would love to see the Church divest itself from the Health Care System. After all it is cutting into the Liberal money stream.
The critics base their criticism this time on claiming that the church by threatening the closure of their Catholic Churches is harming society. They are starting to sound like they have taken a page out of Hitler’s play book. He claimed that sterilizing Jewish mothers then killing them was a higher calling for hospitals because in that way they could help stop the spread of the disease of Judaism. What other field than medicine was more capable to serve the community in such a way?
The doctors agreed and the church later tacitly agreed by doing little to stop it. Both went merrily on their way. The doctors later said they didn’t have a choice. Just doing their jobs, they said. We thought then that the excuse wasn’t good enough. We let some go, punished others and hung the worst offenders.
Isn’t it ironic that this new legislation entitled “The Freedom of Choice Act” is forcing religious doctors to fight for their freedom of choice so as not to be forced to perform abortions? Fighting to stop making part of their job description killing unborn babies?
I haven’t even asked about the freedom of choice for the unborn.
Here is a link to an article about the new attempt to force FOCA upon the public and all hospitals. I say all because I assume that there are doctors not in a Catholic hospital that will also be forced to follow the new law or lose their jobs.
-----link-----
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/religion/story/E6E47067257DB95E862575710014DD57?OpenDocument
--------------
Happy thoughts this Sunday
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS.
-----link to Nuremberg trial-----
http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/php/docs_swi.php?DI=1&text=medical
No comments:
Post a Comment