Religious interventions and my thoughts on it

I have been debating on whether I wanted to make a post about this or not. A recent news story has inspired me to write something. This may be a long post.

A couple of weeks ago I had a discussion with one of my best friends about religion. Its a discussion we don't have all that often, and in general I don't discuss religion with too many friends of mine as a whole (theres one or two that I'll talk to about religion and some certain aspect that frustrates me). I'm not going to say too much on specifics what my friend and I talked about. The main theme of it was that on one aspect my friend believes in something that I don't agree with and I was trying to basically find out why

A couple things came from it. To a certain degree, it solidified my position on something that some religions (or denominations when it comes to Christianity) believe in. One of these is some of the beliefs as far as medical treatment. There have been many news stories lately in the news of some kid/teenager who died cause their parents decided to not get them treated. Instead, they prayed. One that has stuck through me is a girl who was around the age of I think 12, died from ketoacidosis (I believe) from diabetes. She was sick, her parents did not take her to the doctors for weeks and she ended up dying.

This type of thing is bullshit. We have come to a point in medical science that certain treatments are damn easy to administer. Getting a shot of insulin, while annoying (and if I had to do it I would be a bit pissy cause I'm not a fan of needles in general) is still far more preferable to dying. Her parents, make the decision for their daughter that instead of getting a simple fucking treatment, to let her die cause they wanted to pray and that would make things all better. Well guess what Sherlock, didn't work. And the sad thing is, most of the parents and people who run into this don't see what happened. They just say "I didn't pray hard enough" or "It was Gods will to take her life." No asshole, you murdered your kid.

A recent news story from South Africa http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20090220054001117C891248

The story is about a 12 year old who's battle with leukemia requires that she get a blood transfusion. She (as well as her parents) did not want it (they are Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that blood is bad, Acts 21 verse 25 is generally what they cite to justify this). However, the doctors basically said that if she did not get it, she would die. A court overruled the parents and basically forced the kid to get it.

To a certain degree I'm still torn on this. However, theres a couple of things. One, the parents I'm sure has indoctrinated their kid to say that blood is bad, they will be offending God if they get it and its wrong. Now, if you throw out the appeal to emotion there, whats the evidence that its bad. Not a damn thing I can tell. And thats pretty much what the court looks like they used. "Lets look at the real evidence on why someone would basically commit suicide by non treatment. There is none? Ok, then she gets it."

I happen to agree with the courts decision in this case. The kid is not really old enough, more than likely, to understand all the facts on blood transfusions and medical science that says why getting a transfusion is far better than dying. She is just parroting what her parents beliefs are without understanding the reality of the consequences. However, this is where I am torn, and goes back to my original discussion with my friend.

What if she was 18 and an adult. Should she have the right to refuse treatment, after considering the medical science and understanding the beliefs of the religion she was basically born into and forced on that would more than likely lead to her death. I would have to say Yes, if she were an adult we would have to allow her the right to refuse treatment. A part of me says "Fuck no, if you are refusing a simple treatment just cause you have faith in that it will either work out or you will go to heaven if you end up dying, then you are missing something and should be forced into treatment cause you are wrong." But I have to allow people to have the freedom of this. I think they are wrong, but if we start forcing adults into treatment than you run into a bully system in that the majority wins. And I also thing that until you are an adult, if your parents are basically killing you for their religion, the government should intervene to save them from their parents.

I realize to a certain extent its a bit hypocritical to say that adults have the right to do what they want to themselves but not to their kids. But lets put it this way. If I look at the hypothetical of if when I was a young kid and I got hurt, and my parents didn't want me to get a transfusion and I knew then what I know now I would have been pissed. Its a bit different if you are making decisions yourself vs for your kids.

I know this has been confusing but ill sum it up. If you are an adult I think you should have the right to make decisions for yourself on medical treatment. But I think that when it comes to your kids, there are some decisions that you can make and that the courts should be able to overrule you on depending on your reasons. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. Also for those that want to make decisions for themselves on not getting treatment, I would argue that people should try to convince that your reasoning may be flawed.

On a personal note, this is the part that I would have so much of a hard time with. If my friend decided that she did not want to get treatment for something as simple as a shot or blood transfusion and then died, I would be devastated. I liken it to if your significant other decided on doing something that got them killed (such as a police officer) there may be those who while allowing them to do that sort of job would still be very upset if they were killed on duty, and may still try to convince them to take a desk job.

On a semi related note, the recent news about the anti-vaccination crowd is a bit similar. Not really, they are bat shit crazy and need to be stopped. Most of them aren't referring necessarily to a religious aspect, its just misinformation and lies that reinforce their belief that vaccinations for example cause autism. BZZT wrong. In that vein, I do think that their kids should be forced to get vaccinations. By not having them, they put many others at risk. There is a difference here in that if you don't get treatment for say diabetes or a transfusion, you are affecting yourself. You deciding not to vaccinate your kids cause of some kooky belief that it causes autism even though all credible studies show thats not the case and that if your kid gets infected they run the risk of killing or at least making other sick, you lose.

Ok. Im done for now. I'm going to in the probably not too distant future writing something else that came up in my discussion with my friend in that why do I have such an issue with religion (which some of that is contained in this post) and also what is it that I in fact do believe in.

Chariots of Iron and other things

I found a new podcast thats fun to listen to (if you are interested in religion and news associated with such). Similar to the Non Prophets Radio show I listen to.

http://www.chariotsofiron.com
http://www.nonprophetsradio.com

As far as other things, I joined Twitter. http://twitter.com/gizmoiscariot

I am way too connected. Oddly I like it.

Ill probably do a longer post this weekend about some stuff. Not sure what stuff yet. But stuff.

O Brave New World...

So I read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Been on a dystopian kick lately, reading 1984 and watching the movie and V for Vendetta. Not sure why but I enjoy these stories, perhaps cause it would be interesting on some level to be in them, even for a short period (in reality, with perhaps the exception of Brave New World, I don't think I would want to be in any of the others I mentioned and ill explain why.)

Brave New World differs in that for the most part, people are completely and utterly brain washed and happy. V for Vendetta, people have generally resigned themselves to the current situation, feeling theres no way to change it yet its not bad enough to change it yet (V somewhat fixes this). 1984, people are brainwashed a bit different than Brave New World in that its half brainwashed to think that its as good as it can get and half for fear that if they questioned it, they will be found out, tortured, sent to room 101 and killed.

Brave New World is a little different, partly because you are brainwashed from the time you are an infant and even before as embryos. Its generally presented that people don't question anything because they have been brainwashed not to and that they are happy with the drug soma and happiness is paramount to just about anything. Many times in the story its shown that Lenina and even Bernard (who does go against the status quo) still have things so ingrained that they recoil in horror.

One of the interesting and certainly ethical issues brought up in Brave New World is the idea of people no longer having babies but the state. The different castes that are presented (Alpha, Beta, Delta, Gamma, Epsilon in that order) are picked at basically conception. The higher ones get one sperm to an egg, whereas a process thats used to copy the lower ones are used to have one egg pumping out something like 8 - 90 some odd people from the same egg, and several thousand from the same "mother". They also stunt growth as well as using aspects from Pavlov's experients to condition people to hate flowers and books.

On the same idea, people are quite free with sex. There is no marriage and basically everyone is polyamorous, being able to have anyone for sex and companionship. In fact its encouraged (or at least, frowned upon if someone is found to just be with one particular person). Girls are not allowed in general to get pregnant, being conditioned to keep track of their cycles and be on birth control forever (in fact, many are born sterile).

Enough recounting the book (you can read it). The main thing I wanted to comment on was the two interesting concepts that I don't see as much of a problem with, those being the polyamorous nature and the soma drug thats used to take holidays. The issue of both of these is perhaps moderation would be a good choice. Many rely on the drug 24/7 so that they don't have to experience anything bad. If anything that might be stressful comes up, its conditioned to take some to make you happy, and depending on how much you take you end up taking a "holiday" which is basically a LSD like experience. In general, I would not have a problem (and don't for the current drugs that are out there) if people used it as a recreation type thing.

I personally have never had any drugs (save for caffeine and alcohol) which I don't think qualify quite in this context. However, and this position has changed recently, I as a general rule don't have issues with people taking drugs on two conditions. That its done in moderation (unlike in the book) and responsibly and two, the main/side effects do not cause real harm to the person. Number two is the reason that I still have major problems with most drugs that are used, as with in general the exception of weed, most drugs (cocaine, meth and heroine just to name a few big ones) do real harm to the person taking them. The other issue is the crime associated, though if they were legal that would go away for the most part (though it would really have to be globally legal, otherwise theres still money and money is what causes most of the issues).

One the polyamorous stuff, I don't have a real issue with this. However, this is also based on the idea of moderation and choice. It would (and is) a choice. In the book, it really isn't. You are weird, and outcast and almost on the level of insane if you want to have a monogamous relationship in the Brave New World. It would be interesting if polyamorous behavior was a little more prevalant in today's society, however religion I think causes some of that to not exist currently.

Not sure why, but when I start to write something like this I envision a couple of paragraphs and instead it turns out to be much longer. I wish books were like this in High School, as the books that we were forced to read sucked, were boring and meant jack shit to me. If I had read books like Dune, 1984, Brave New World, Paradise Lost and Neuromancer just to name a few, English would have been far more fun. Instead, most of the books were boring, uninteresting and meaningless. Moby Dick is the closest book that I read that was ok, and even that I found in general boring (im sure some would disagree).

I on a side note thing im going to order a bunch of books when I get paid next, as I was able to read Brave New World, which is about 250 pages in about 3 hours, which means that I can generally clear a novel a weekend. Theres several books that I have been meaning to read, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (the book that Blade Runner is based on), Snow Crash, Ender's Game, H.P. Lovecrafts stuff especially the Cthulhu and perhaps some more that ill have to look into. And yes, this is what happens when you have no social life. In Brave New World, I would certainly but the outcast as there are times, if not most times, that I prefer to be alone (or alone and perhaps talking to people in chat online, as I can multitask far more doing that than I can while in person or on the phone).

Enough of me, time for Super Bowl.