why might christians have problems with transplant surgery? i need two diffrent christians views and a example involing mary and josie (simese twins one had to be killed for the other to survive) and why this caused problems.
(Broken Link Removed)
http://www.catholicdoctors.org.uk/CMQ/Nov_1998/organ_donation.htm
http://www.ethicsforschools.org/transplantation/sub1995.htm
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/couple.refuse.to.abort.conjoined.twins/22311.htm
It is just not a matter of Christians. Consider this: When we get to the point of brain surgery, and someone is dying of a brain disease, are we going to allow brain transplants (as if a donor were on death row, a lifelong pathological killer..think of the ramifications for the brain recipient).
Well, we are not there yet, most of the stuff being transplanted are pieces...eye corneas, kidneys, liver parts, bone marrow, skin, hearts. So my question is this: Why are religion gurus so concerned about making laws which restrict others?
Now on the cojoined twins...let me expand it to other birth defects: microcrania, deformed hearts, or lungs. These are horrible burdens for parents to face, and to make choices. Since when is the village priest better able to decide God's will?
Isn't it odd that religious gurus don't like to answer those questions? Personally, I have had my fill of righteous right wingers telling me what is moral right, and what is God's will. My experience is that when God sends a message, it rings directly between God and the receiver.
Good luck.
Christians may have various concerns or ethical considerations regarding transplant surgery due to different interpretations of religious teachings. Here are two different Christian perspectives and an example involving Mary and Josie, hypothetical Siamese twins:
1. The Sanctity of Life Perspective: Some Christians believe in the inherent value and sanctity of all human life, and they may have concerns about transplant surgery because it involves the use of medical interventions that could potentially harm or take the life of the donor. According to this perspective, intentionally causing harm or death to one person for the sake of saving another might be seen as a violation of the sanctity of life.
Example Involving Mary and Josie: From this perspective, Mary and Josie would be understood as two separate individuals with their own inherent value and dignity. In this case, some Christians might argue against separating the twins surgically if it involves intentionally killing one to save the other, as it would be seen as directly taking a life, which is morally wrong.
2. The Principle of Double Effect: Another Christian perspective is based on the principle of double effect. This principle allows for morally acceptable actions with both good and bad consequences, as long as the intention is solely to achieve the good and the bad consequence is an unintentional side effect.
Example Involving Mary and Josie: In this perspective, Christians might argue that separating the twins to save Josie's life, with the unintended consequence of Mary not surviving, could be morally justifiable. They would reason that the intent is to save a life (Josie), and Mary's death is an unfortunate, but unintended, consequence. This view allows for the principle of double effect to be applied in certain situations, where the overall net effect is considered to be morally positive.
It's important to note that Christian perspectives on this matter can vary, and individuals may hold different views. These examples are theoretical but reflect some common approaches Christians might consider when grappling with ethical questions related to transplant surgery.