This morning, on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade (the landmark decision making abortion legal in the United State) I decided to compare Washington D.C´s two main newspapers. The Washington Times, the more conservative of the two, wrote a piece about the thousands upon thousands who will march in protest to the Capitol in the annual Pro-Life March. The Washington Post, the more liberal, wrote about the RU-482 has made abortions easier and more private.
While the coverage of this anniversary is what was to be expected, I find the usage of linguistics interesting. The Washington Times does not hesitate to use the words Pro-Life, or even Pro-Lifers, indicating an admittance of the fact that abortion ceases the life of an unborn child. Already, they have admitted their frame of reference by not calling the protesters anti-abortion.
The Post writes about ending a pregnancy, instead of ending a life. They quote someone saying that the R-482 has gone a long way in ¨normalizing abortion¨ which makes one assume that the writer believes that abortion can be considered normal. I am quite sure the thousands of people marching in Washington would not agree with that statement.
It is interesting though that the Washington Post is more forthright with their support of abortion, while the Times´ stance is clear only through their word choice. Obviously there are many people on both side of this debate. Perhaps the Pro-Life movement would be better served if conservative newspapers were brave enough to more openly voice their opinion.
martedì 22 gennaio 2008
lunedì 21 gennaio 2008
Afganistan: A Film Perspective
The film version of the best-selling the book The Kite Runner was recently banned in Afganistan. The Kite Runner recounts the story of young childhood friends from differet sects in Afganistan and explores themes such as betrayal, ethinicity, and sexual predators. The only reason the head authority of imported films gave was that “Some of the film’s scenes will arouse sensitivity among some of our people.” Paramount Pictures only comment was that they never had the intention to market the film in Afganistan.
Censorship is always a hot-button issue, especially in America where freedom of expression is so highly valued. However, what interests me is the America interpretation of Afghan events. I wonder if Afganis would even recognize the values in this film. Truly, the story centers around a boy who atones for his mistakes in the past by hard working self-improvement. Self improvement through hard-work is certainly a virtue which many Americans appreciate. I wonder if Afghans might tell the story of this young boy differently. Clearly, there is much suffering in the history of Afganistan, yet reasons for this suffering are not given.
Perhaps if this film was shown in Afganistan, the people would only see commercialized America. Who knows why the film is being censored, but it would certainly be interesting to see the reaction. Maybe there is a fear of the people of Afganistan gaining another perspective on their situation. While Americans might not see the entire story through this film, it certainly will show many how it is that Americans see the conflict in this tragedy ridden country.
Censorship is always a hot-button issue, especially in America where freedom of expression is so highly valued. However, what interests me is the America interpretation of Afghan events. I wonder if Afganis would even recognize the values in this film. Truly, the story centers around a boy who atones for his mistakes in the past by hard working self-improvement. Self improvement through hard-work is certainly a virtue which many Americans appreciate. I wonder if Afghans might tell the story of this young boy differently. Clearly, there is much suffering in the history of Afganistan, yet reasons for this suffering are not given.
Perhaps if this film was shown in Afganistan, the people would only see commercialized America. Who knows why the film is being censored, but it would certainly be interesting to see the reaction. Maybe there is a fear of the people of Afganistan gaining another perspective on their situation. While Americans might not see the entire story through this film, it certainly will show many how it is that Americans see the conflict in this tragedy ridden country.
What is a Research?
Newspapers in Rome have been full of news about the recent protest of a limited number of professors and students at the La Sapienza against the visit of Pope Benedict XVI. This protest centered around the argument that the Pope (and perhaps the Roman Catholic Church) is opposed to a spirit of free inquiry and research. It became clear this past Sunday, or perhaps even before, that the majority of Roman students do not hold this view. The Pope met thousands of students at the Sunday Angelus, thanking them for their support and recognition that the Catholic faith was in support a spirit of free inquiry in pursuit of the truth.
Were the protestors against the Church? Or was all of this merely a misunderstanding? Regardless, the protest seemed to have backfired as it gave the Pope and the Church a chance to publicly express their views about research and education. This debate has raged for centuries, but the supposed distinction between science/research and religion has been especially heated since the advent of research universities in the last century. Suddenly, as these protesters imply, one seems forced to choose between revealed truth and free research. Even supposedly Catholic universities feel the need to emphasize that they are a university primarily, but happen to be one that is Catholic.
Cardinal Newman defines the university in a way which renders this distinction between faith and research invalid. He suggests that the very definition of a university demonstrates that a university is supportive of catholicity and research alike. He says that a university is naturally oriented towards pursuit of the truth, all studies and research lead to a discovery of the truth. If that Catholic faith is the truth, then any truth which university research would uncover would be compatiable. In this way, it is possible that free research is enlighted by faith and directed towards it. One wonders whether these students and professors accept the existence of objective truth, or if their insistence of this facsimile of 'free research' is based on contemporary philosophy wallowing in relativism.
Were the protestors against the Church? Or was all of this merely a misunderstanding? Regardless, the protest seemed to have backfired as it gave the Pope and the Church a chance to publicly express their views about research and education. This debate has raged for centuries, but the supposed distinction between science/research and religion has been especially heated since the advent of research universities in the last century. Suddenly, as these protesters imply, one seems forced to choose between revealed truth and free research. Even supposedly Catholic universities feel the need to emphasize that they are a university primarily, but happen to be one that is Catholic.
Cardinal Newman defines the university in a way which renders this distinction between faith and research invalid. He suggests that the very definition of a university demonstrates that a university is supportive of catholicity and research alike. He says that a university is naturally oriented towards pursuit of the truth, all studies and research lead to a discovery of the truth. If that Catholic faith is the truth, then any truth which university research would uncover would be compatiable. In this way, it is possible that free research is enlighted by faith and directed towards it. One wonders whether these students and professors accept the existence of objective truth, or if their insistence of this facsimile of 'free research' is based on contemporary philosophy wallowing in relativism.
sabato 19 gennaio 2008
Gender: More Than Just a State of Mind
Fox News reported today that a Catholic hospital refused to perform a breast augmentation on a person who was born a male. The patient, Charlene Hastings, had undergone a transgender surgery and was rejected for surgery, because the hospital deemed it inappropriate to perform surgery on someone they considered a man.
Hastings filed a suit for discrimination citing that the hospital staff told her that this surgery was not part of God's plan for her. She disagrees and believes God desires her to have this breast augmentation surgery. After all, for Hastings gender is subjective (Hastings received a transgender surgery because he felt that he was actually a female). If gender is subjective why shouldn't the will of God be the same?
Let me present this situation in another way- there is no reason to get into the Divine Will or gender theory in this case. Why? Because transgender surgery does not actually change the gender of the patient. Instead, transgender surgery accomplishes a mutilation of genitalia and replaces it with a non-functioning facsmile of the other sex. In other words, 'Charlene' Hastings is not a woman because she was born a man and can not function as a woman physically or emotionally. Therefore, this is not just another woman seeking plastic surgery, but a man who has already had one surgery that was extremely damaging to his body.
Hastings filed a suit for discrimination citing that the hospital staff told her that this surgery was not part of God's plan for her. She disagrees and believes God desires her to have this breast augmentation surgery. After all, for Hastings gender is subjective (Hastings received a transgender surgery because he felt that he was actually a female). If gender is subjective why shouldn't the will of God be the same?
Let me present this situation in another way- there is no reason to get into the Divine Will or gender theory in this case. Why? Because transgender surgery does not actually change the gender of the patient. Instead, transgender surgery accomplishes a mutilation of genitalia and replaces it with a non-functioning facsmile of the other sex. In other words, 'Charlene' Hastings is not a woman because she was born a man and can not function as a woman physically or emotionally. Therefore, this is not just another woman seeking plastic surgery, but a man who has already had one surgery that was extremely damaging to his body.
giovedì 17 gennaio 2008
Religious Politics
President George W. Bush has been under criticism for his recent inclusion of religion in his diplomatic addresses. His visits to the Middle East have been of a sensitive nature, not only politically, but also religiously. He is noted as saying that monotheism is the basis for freedom, and subsequently democratic ideals. An article in the International Herald Tribune noted that many scholars would disagree with President Bush that actually, monarchy was much more in line with Christian ideals. He received criticism, because it was deemed inappropriate to talk about religion in these visits, but I think he also highlights the debate over the relationship between religion and politics for individuals.
This article reminded me of the importance of questioning the alliance of politics with religion. In the United States many religions tend to sympathize with one party or another, almost all Christian religions in the U.S.A support democracy and capitalism. Truly, the United States was founded on Christian principles, but particularly those of a deist nature which claimed that God created the world, but has little active presence in it. Upon further reflection, it is clear that capitalism has advantages, but exclusive support of a system that has its flaws could be detrimental.
In a similar way, the trend of orthodox Catholics to vote on the Republican ticket without any reflection is also dangerous. Certainly, the Republican platform is prolife, which is also an essential teaching of the Catholic Church. However, there are many different platforms of both parties, which individuals must discern whether these are in line with his or her own beliefs. Catholic moral teachings demonstrate that man as a rational individual, must act according to his conscience and his Truth. There is nothing in Catholic moral teaching that suggests that the Republican party is the "Catholic Party." It might serve many Catholics to also consider not only whether the party is prolife, but whether political canidates have personally shown that they will fight for the prolife cause. It is possible that there will be a Democratic canidate who will not actively support abortion, but will fight for other positive things and that he would be a better than a weak Republican canidate who won't do anything to support life.
President Bush may or may not have applied religion correctly in his diplomatic visits, but he brings up an important point of discussion. Can we divorce our personal beliefs from our politics? Will politicians ever act only from their platforms instead of their religion, or lack thereof? Whenever a person acts, they are acting from their individual background, experience, and beliefs. If they were not to do so, they would be mere automatons. At least Bush is admitting that he is not a puppet of his party, but a man who sees the world from a particular framework. In the upcoming canidates, perhaps both canidates and voters alike should consider not only the party platforms, but the men and women who are running for office.
This article reminded me of the importance of questioning the alliance of politics with religion. In the United States many religions tend to sympathize with one party or another, almost all Christian religions in the U.S.A support democracy and capitalism. Truly, the United States was founded on Christian principles, but particularly those of a deist nature which claimed that God created the world, but has little active presence in it. Upon further reflection, it is clear that capitalism has advantages, but exclusive support of a system that has its flaws could be detrimental.
In a similar way, the trend of orthodox Catholics to vote on the Republican ticket without any reflection is also dangerous. Certainly, the Republican platform is prolife, which is also an essential teaching of the Catholic Church. However, there are many different platforms of both parties, which individuals must discern whether these are in line with his or her own beliefs. Catholic moral teachings demonstrate that man as a rational individual, must act according to his conscience and his Truth. There is nothing in Catholic moral teaching that suggests that the Republican party is the "Catholic Party." It might serve many Catholics to also consider not only whether the party is prolife, but whether political canidates have personally shown that they will fight for the prolife cause. It is possible that there will be a Democratic canidate who will not actively support abortion, but will fight for other positive things and that he would be a better than a weak Republican canidate who won't do anything to support life.
President Bush may or may not have applied religion correctly in his diplomatic visits, but he brings up an important point of discussion. Can we divorce our personal beliefs from our politics? Will politicians ever act only from their platforms instead of their religion, or lack thereof? Whenever a person acts, they are acting from their individual background, experience, and beliefs. If they were not to do so, they would be mere automatons. At least Bush is admitting that he is not a puppet of his party, but a man who sees the world from a particular framework. In the upcoming canidates, perhaps both canidates and voters alike should consider not only the party platforms, but the men and women who are running for office.
mercoledì 16 gennaio 2008
Fiction: True or False?
“The Golden Compass” has caused a considerable amount of controversy concerning the negative view of Christianity and the obvious pagan elements in the film. The film recounts the story of a young girl who goes to a parallel universe, controlled by ‘the Magisterium’ and has the responsibility to open the world to the truth, as revealed by a golden compass.
Certainly, the film is full of pagan elements. Every person has a familiar, which the trailer bluntly calls a demon. The North of this universe is controlled by witches, whose prophecies call the main little girl into another world. On another note, the film is technically fantastic. The animation of animals, the camera shots, and the score are breathtaking. In this way, it is absolutely a cinematographic success.
A film that has made such a splash was sure to arouse controversy. However, as usual, I think that people has missed the point. Many who defend the film say that Christians are being extremists and that there is nothing wrong with fantasy. In fact, I agree that fantasy can be a wonderful form of fiction.
The real problem lies in whether or not this form of fiction adheres to the nature of reality. It is quite possible to have a story that has elements of fantasy, but adheres to the objective nature in reality. In other words, emphasizes that there is an objective morality, with an order to the universe, and a clear line between good and evil. The question that occurs to me is whether the Golden Compass attempts to deceive its audience by blurring the line between good and evil and luring them into a world where true order does not exist. It is important to challenge fiction by realizing that fiction, like nonfiction, can be false or true.
Certainly, the film is full of pagan elements. Every person has a familiar, which the trailer bluntly calls a demon. The North of this universe is controlled by witches, whose prophecies call the main little girl into another world. On another note, the film is technically fantastic. The animation of animals, the camera shots, and the score are breathtaking. In this way, it is absolutely a cinematographic success.
A film that has made such a splash was sure to arouse controversy. However, as usual, I think that people has missed the point. Many who defend the film say that Christians are being extremists and that there is nothing wrong with fantasy. In fact, I agree that fantasy can be a wonderful form of fiction.
The real problem lies in whether or not this form of fiction adheres to the nature of reality. It is quite possible to have a story that has elements of fantasy, but adheres to the objective nature in reality. In other words, emphasizes that there is an objective morality, with an order to the universe, and a clear line between good and evil. The question that occurs to me is whether the Golden Compass attempts to deceive its audience by blurring the line between good and evil and luring them into a world where true order does not exist. It is important to challenge fiction by realizing that fiction, like nonfiction, can be false or true.
venerdì 11 gennaio 2008
A Matter of Death or Sickness
The developing treatment of AIDS in the 1990s was all the rage, and rightly so since it saved so many lives. Now the International Herald Tribune reports that these medicated AIDS patients are experiencing all sorts of illnesses, some related directly to the disease and others not. In fact, the thrust of this article is the exploration of how these illnesses and pre-mature aging affects are related to the very medicine that was used to treat AIDS. Is it melodramatic to ask, is there a fate worse than death?
Polling and research suggests that the number of people successfully treated for AIDS has increased, as has the number of people experiencing painful side effects. Now researchers are focusing on discovering the roots of their pain: natural aging, AIDS, or the medication themselves. The article ends with the question: how are we going to help recovering AIDS patients through the suffering that has resulted from their treatment?
The question that comes to my mind, which was not addressed in the article, is whether it would be ethical not to treat AIDS patients. Obviously, if the person is unable to make a decision it seems that the doctors’ first responsibility is to choose life. Yet, the drugs used result in the pre-mature aging with side affects from heart disease to vascular necrosis. Essentially, research shows that the medicine might not only save lives, but also endanger them in other areas.
So what is the solution to this quandary?
To my mind, as is often the case, the best solution is the truth and education. In other words: to discover as much as possible about the side-affects of medicine and to inform the patient. If the patient is a rational adult they have a decision to make: to receive medicine or to die a natural death. For now, the health professionals can offer true facts about the side effects of the medicine and let each person weigh their options.
Polling and research suggests that the number of people successfully treated for AIDS has increased, as has the number of people experiencing painful side effects. Now researchers are focusing on discovering the roots of their pain: natural aging, AIDS, or the medication themselves. The article ends with the question: how are we going to help recovering AIDS patients through the suffering that has resulted from their treatment?
The question that comes to my mind, which was not addressed in the article, is whether it would be ethical not to treat AIDS patients. Obviously, if the person is unable to make a decision it seems that the doctors’ first responsibility is to choose life. Yet, the drugs used result in the pre-mature aging with side affects from heart disease to vascular necrosis. Essentially, research shows that the medicine might not only save lives, but also endanger them in other areas.
So what is the solution to this quandary?
To my mind, as is often the case, the best solution is the truth and education. In other words: to discover as much as possible about the side-affects of medicine and to inform the patient. If the patient is a rational adult they have a decision to make: to receive medicine or to die a natural death. For now, the health professionals can offer true facts about the side effects of the medicine and let each person weigh their options.
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)