Tuesday, July 4, 2017

Vatican Criticized for “Cowardly” Statement After Court Says Hospital Can Kill Charlie Gard (Vatican Pro-Life, How could you not save Charlie)

Vatican Criticized for “Cowardly” Statement After Court Says Hospital Can Kill Charlie Gard

 INTERNATIONAL   CHRISTINE ROUSSELLE   JUN 30, 2017   |   6:20PM    WASHINGTON, DC
On Friday, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life issued a rather curious statement onthe sad case of British baby Charlie Gard. Gard has effectively been sentenced to die by a European “human rights” court, who decided that moving him to the United States for treatment (on his parents’ dime) would be inhumane and only further increase his suffering.
The Pontifical Academy for Life’s statement was, in a word, “cowardly.” The Academy inexplicably seemed to side with the court ordering Gard’s life support to be withdrawn, stating that while this was a very “complex” situation, “[…] we must also accept the limits of medicine and, as stated in paragraph 65 of the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, avoid aggressive medical procedures that are disproportionate to any expected results or excessively burdensome to the patient or the family.”
Many people were justifiably disturbed by the Academy’s statement, including, apparently, Pope Francis himself. Several hours after the statement was issued, Pope Francis tweeted from his official account that it is a “duty of love that God entrusts to all” to defend human life. This would appear to be a “subtweet” at the Academy’s statement.
Also of note–Pope Francis only tweeted this from his English  and Italian language @Pontifex accounts, and not on the German, Spanish, French, or Italian accounts. [Editors’ note: Pope Francis did in fact tweet this from his Italian account, but not French, Spanish, or German.]
While it’s good to see the Vatican dial back that horrendous rhetoric (especially from, quite literally, the top), why was that statement even released in the first place?
LifeNews Note: Christine Rousselle is a web editor with Townhall.com.


at

Protesters Flood the Streets Demanding to “Save Charlie Gard” (People Reading This Pray as Hard as You Can for Baby Charlie, Please)

Protesters Flood the Streets Demanding to “Save Charlie Gard”

 INTERNATIONAL   MICAIAH BILGER   JUL 3, 2017   |   3:15PM    LONDON, ENGLAND
Hundreds of people rallied over the weekend to support British infant Charlie Gard whose life could be ended at any moment.
Charlie’s case gained international attention as his parents fought a series of court battles for their son, but ultimately lost.
Against Charlie’s parents’ wishes, the European Court of Human Rights ruled last week that a hospital can remove Charlie’s life support and allow him to die. His parents wanted to take their 10-month-old son, who suffers from a rare mitochondrial disease, to the United States for an experimental treatment; and they raised more than $1 million for his care.
Charlie’s parents also asked if they could take him home to die there, but the court also ruled against this request. The hospital, Great Ormond Street Hospital, is expected to remove his life support within the next week.
Over the weekend, hundreds of people gathered to protest the court’s decision. The AP reports many chanted “Save Charlie Gard” and others held a large banner proclaiming the court’s decision “murder.”
The Sun reports a large crowd gathered outside Buckingham Palace Sunday in London to urge leaders to save Charlie’s life.
London teenager Alex Nagel said he helped to organize the protest because he understands how important it is to support families like Charlie’s.
“We wanted to support Charlie and show him love,” Nagel said. “I’m only 17 – but when I grow up one day, when I have children, I would want anyone to support me the way I’m supporting them.”
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures.
Another group protested in Lincoln, England. Organizer Charlene Barnes called for “justice for Charlie” and said he should be allowed to go home, if nothing else, the Lincolnite reports.
“I want him to be allowed home to spend the last few hours with his mummy and daddy who have been stripped of their rights,” Barnes told the news outlet. “It’s so unfair, but they have so many people supporting them.”
Charlie’s parents, Connie Yates and Chris Gard, have been advocating for their son for months. Charlie has a rare disease, but his parents did extensive research and discovered an experimental treatment in the U.S. that could help him.
In March, however, Charlie’s doctors recommended that they remove his life support and said there was nothing more they could do to help Charlie. The little boy suffered brain damage from his disease and cannot breathe on his own.
But Charlie’s parents took the matter to court, and eventually the case was appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. On Wednesday, the high court ruled against them and will not permit them to seek alternative treatments for their son, according to The Guardian.
The judges said they did not think Charlie would benefit from the experimental treatment, and it could cause him greater pain and suffering.
“The domestic courts had concluded, on the basis of extensive, high-quality expert evidence, that it was most likely Charlie was being exposed to continued pain, suffering and distress and that undergoing experimental treatment with no prospects of success would offer no benefit, and continue to cause him significant harm,” they stated in the ruling.
As Townhall editor Christine Rousselle wrote in reaction to the ruling: “It’s absurd that a court can claim to know what’s in Charlie’s best interest. His parents are neither negligent nor incompetent, and they should not be prohibited from trying a last-ditch effort to try to improve their son’s life. Further, the fact that they’re not allowed to choose when and where to withdraw life support on their terms is maddening. This is a sickening violation of basic humanity.”


at

Proof That Pro-Abortion Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring? (He Needs to Go. We Need New Blood, Pro-Life Blood)

Proof That Pro-Abortion Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring?

 NATIONAL   CORTNEY O'BRIEN   JUL 3, 2017   |   6:22PM    WASHINGTON, DC
One paragraph hiding in an NPR piece has scholars wondering if Justice Anthony Kennedy is looking for a way out of his Supreme Court seat.
Rumors were already swirling for some time, but Nina Totenberg just fanned the flames.
But it is unlikely that Kennedy will remain on the court for the full four years of the Trump presidency. While he long ago hired his law clerks for the coming term, he has not done so for the following term (beginning Oct. 2018), and has let applicants for those positions know he is considering retirement.
(NPR)
Retiring justices tend to only hire one clerk, as the New York Magazine points out. Ruth Bader Ginsburg appears determined to stay put, considering she has already chosen her clerks through 2020.
Should Kennedy retire, President Trump will have the opportunity to appoint another conservative justice. His choice in Neil Gorsuch to replace Antonin Scalia was apparently a home run for conservatives, judging by The New York Times’s recent editorial. In it, the editors note Gorsuch seems to have no plans to compromise.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., a staunch conservative in his own right, often seeks out points of compromise among the justices. On June 26, the court’s last opinion day, Justice Gorsuch appeared to be having none of it.
June 26, of course, was the day the court ruled in Trinity Lutheran Church’s favor, declaring that the state of Missouri had no right to deny the religious institution access to its tire scrap program. In his opinion, Gorsuch wrote that, “The general principles here do not permit discrimination against religious exercise — whether on the playground or anywhere else.”
The Times made sure to also note that “by rights,” Gorsuch’s seat should be occupied by Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee.
If Trump does get another vacancy on the court, expect him to return to this list of experienced judges.
LifeNews Note: Cortney O’Brien is a Townhall web editor, where this was originally published.


at
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *