Saturday, February 28, 2009

Medical Care for Theists: Prayer and Leeches only

If we are honest, theist hypocrisy know no bounds.

When is the growing percentage of non-superstitious in New Zealand society, going to start say “enough is enough” and ‘return fire’, using ironically the same rights Christians (and their allies)conveniently hide behind?

Time after time we’ve seen groups of Christians fighting every-step of the way, to prevent medical breakthroughs, such as we see currently with stem-cell.

As soon as medical/scientific advancements are in conflict with religion, like stem-cell is currently - castigation and obtrusion occurs.

Protest is of course every-ones right, but later in the passage of time these evangelical protests are always proven to be self-centred platitudes, primordially laughable.

Inevitably what happens is, at some later stage, is these very same protesters or their loved-ones, needs to seek the same treatment they rallied against.

These two-faced, hypocrites have no compulsion seeking such treatment either.

On the other-hand God-fearing luddites are perfectly happy for others to be denied access to medical treatments, even if it means a miserable life or premature death for some other poor unfortunate – but only, if they themselves are not afflicted.

So as you are about to read my proposal, don’t feel any sort of compassion towards theists, for these very same individuals want to rob you and your closest, one of the basis rudiments of modern life, to protect their beliefs.

Always keep in the back of your mind, theists want their beliefs, to over-ride yours – even if it means you watched your own child die in a pitiless painful, fashion – when a cure is available, but denied to you because of their ancient superstitions.

Large tracts of ‘loving’ Jesus followers in this country, want to deny childless couples the opportunity to have a family, using medical treatments.

Cutting to the chase, what I’m suggesting is where resources are stretched in the health system, care is given to those who will appreciate it & respond.

This is the same as an oncologist who opts to treat a non-smoking lung-cancer patient, ahead of one who continues to puff away.

Therefore our health-system already rations medical care, so my proposition is not as radical as it first appears.

Doctors, make ethical ‘life & death’ choices on daily basis, and we don’t raise an eye-brow.

So where resources are stretched why aren’t Health Boards, using the discretionary powers available to them, to allocate care to those who want it first?

As an example, Catholics would automatically go to the bottom of IVF treatment.

Their own Church has fought tooth and nail, to get IVF banned, yet when it suits them, Catholic couples will seek out the very-same treatment that they tried hard to prevent – so it’s hard to feel sorry for them, and besides they can get local Priest to assist (no, not in a Biblical sense but a pastoral one, if that’s what you thought I was inferring to, although I guess the premise isn’t entirely out of the realms)

Why shouldn’t a grateful couple who want a baby and have no objection to IVF treatment, get priority over a couple who aren’t at all enthusiastic about the treatment, due to ethical grounds?

Further, the outcomes from couples who embrace a treatment such as IVF, are surely going to be more positive overall, than those who are sceptical, and acting under duress & facing outside pressure to reject the ungodly procedure.

Based on experience health-providers have a fair idea which of the couples in this example, is more likely to miss appointments, so precedency is both of benefit to the doctors and nurses, also ultimately, the maligned tax-payer.

Our medical practitioners already respond to religious/cultural beliefs.

Hospitals bow to pressure from the superstitious, giving them their own separate areas, actively assisting a policy of sectarianism and supporting a policy of privilege, writing it into law.

Jehovah Witness’s for example, are given the right to die, rather than submit to a blood transfusion.

The religious precedent is already in existence – I’m merely taking the same entrenched statutory privileges bestowed on religion, to their logical conclusion.

Asking for exclusive rights is not a one-way street, and should come with barbs.

Hypocritical theists can’t have it both ways, when it comes to medical treatments, that upset their primitive God and his best-selling book.

On one hand theists can’t ask for a separate place to pray, 'their men' on the ward, at the tax-payers expense, then in the next breath announce “we are the same and demand the same treatment”.

If all these two-faced theists all had true belief in their convictions, like say the witless but gutsy Jehovah Witness’s, there would be plenty of spare hospital beds for us Atheists, and over-flowing cemeteries with crosses on the graves.

So what is wrong with giving priority treatment to someone who wants it, over say someone who wants it stopped full-stop, or objects to it on ethical or religious grounds?

If it is exclusivity through extra rights, they want – let’s give it to them.

Let’s embrace those who abandon reason & science for superstition, as it frees more beds for those who appreciate it.

Let the Hospitals and health-providers play their bluff when it comes to modern treatments that upset their sensibilities, let’s give them what they want & fought for.

It’s also time for theists to practice what they preach, and abdicate themselves from mainstream medicine and get back to basics.

Prayer and leeches.


Anonymous said...

You DO realize that the only three types of human cells that cannot be recreated with non-EMBYRONIC stem cells are CERTAIN brain, nerve and sexual cells. We've circumvented the use of embryonic stem cells, and now have started it up again... pointlessly. Perhaps you'd rebut by saying that those three cells would still save hundreds of thousand of lives or at least alleviate the suffering of many, but in all reality, we do not need cloning, for it would likely end up fucking us over anyway, brain tissue transplants of the hypothalamus would 99.99% likely kill all of its recipients. I love how you tear into religious fanatics but don't realize that the terror you fell at their stupidity is, for the most part, socially ingrained, and without as such you would likely feel very little remorse at what you're so angry about.

Canterbury Atheists said...

Thanks for taking time to make a comment David – pity I didn’t get the gist of a word you had to say.

Tip: Stop taking the red pills and you’ll come-on down from the astral plain.

Have a great day.