You Can Murder Your Child, But You Can’t Make Medical Decisions For Her
As you probably may have gathered, I am an avowed fan of Matt Walsh and The Matt Walsh Blog. He tells the truth and let's the chips fall where they may, come hell, high-water, or liberals. You probably remember the most unpopular, yet powerful post on the suicide of Brittany Maynard and in keeping with that same spirit, here is an older posts of Matt's the examines our nation's forked tongue on the issues of death, suicide, parental responsibility, and an overall lack of the sanctity of life. Be transformed.
Consistency. Consistency is key. So many of our problems could be solved, so much heartache avoided, so many tensions cooled, if only we all tried to be consistent in our beliefs. If only the Powers That Be governed with a consistent philosophy. If only every individual, no matter who they are, reached their conclusions based on a very simple calculation:
“I believe ‘A,’ therefore I believe ‘B,’ therefore I believe ‘C,’ therefore ‘D,’ therefore ‘E,’ therefore… etc.”
The problem is that, more often than not these days, that equation looks more like:
“I believe ‘A,’ and then ‘X,’ but not ‘B,’ maybe ‘C,’ definitely not ‘D,’ but sometimes ‘Y,’ as long as ‘W’… etc.”
There isn’t any coherence from one position to the next. The principles informing one are suddenly abandoned in order to support a conflicting stance. The rhetorical groundwork for this idea but be dismantled and demolished so that I can also advance that idea. This is the effect that progressivism has had on our society.
Progressivism is confusion. Progressives are inherently confused. They know they want what’s easy and what feels good, and they know they hate anything that has the stench of Christianity or traditional morality, but beyond that it’s all a crapshoot. Their doctrines are not comprehensible because they make no effort to be logical. And, because our government, our media, and our academic institutions are largely run by progressives, the bewilderment of their ideology seeps into the American conscience, driving everyone insane.
Nothing really makes sense anymore.
Here’s Exhibit #934,395,329,032:
Back in September, a 17-year-old in Connecticut was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma and told to begin chemotherapy immediately. The girl, Cassandra, underwent two rounds of chemo but decided that she didn’t want to continue with a third. She was so emphatic about it that she ran away from home to escape the treatments. Eventually, Cassandra returned home, presumably she and her parents had a long talk about the situation, and the family ultimately decided to respect Cassandra’s wishes to forgo any further chemotherapy.
That’s when the Department of Children and Families decided to step in.
They asked the court for full custody of Cassandra, and just like that, the girl’s parents were stripped of their rights and Cassandra became property of the state. The teenager was removed from her mother and forcibly admitted into a hospital, where she is, according to court documents, guarded 24 hours a day. She isn’t allowed to leave, to use her cell phone, or to reject any medical procedure the doctors decide to conduct. Just before Christmas, against her will, surgeons operated on her, installing a port in her chest that allows the chemo chemicals to enter her body. I would say that she is being held “like a prisoner,” but even prisoners are allowed to use the phone on occasion.
Again, in case you weren’t paying attention, she is being locked away in a hospital and cut open without the consent of her or her parents.
Her mom filed an appeal and the Connecticut Supreme Court took up the case. She lost. The forced medical procedures will continue on schedule.
Now, step back and look at this entire picture in focus. Consider this quote from the Connecticut DCF, explaining their actions:
“When experts — such as the several physicians involved in this case — tell us with certainty that a child will die as a result of leaving a decision up to a parent, then the Department has a responsibility to take action. Even if the decision might result in criticism, we have an obligation to protect the life of the child…”
It seems dubious that any “expert” could declare with absolute certainty that the girl will die if she doesn’t do exactly as her doctors say. But go ahead and assume that these prophets do possess those powers. Go back and read that quote again. Anything seem odd to you?
If a child will die as a result of a parent’s decision, the government must take action. They have an obligation to protect the lives of children.
They have an obligation to protect the lives of children. What a statement. I wish they meant it. But something tells me you aren’t going to see social services raiding abortion clinics anytime soon. Children dying as a result of a parent’s decision? That happens about a million times a year in this country.
Just pause and think about this: a parent is allowed to directly murder their own infant, yet they do not have the authority to decide on a treatment plan for their teenage children. How can the out-and-out execution of babies be justified under the auspices of “bodily autonomy” and “personal choice,” but declining chemotherapy should be prohibited under the auspices of protecting children from their parents, even if it infringes on personal choice and absolutely obliterates the girl’s so called bodily autonomy?