The Five Non Negotiable When Voting Part III Entrusting My Words to the Holy Spirit Linda Mary Liotino   In this Blog in the series of the five non-negotiable when voting, I opted to combine 3 Embryonic Stem Cell Research and 4 Human Cloning.  Human life is sacred.  The dignity of human beings is the essence of life and should be safeguarded.  Along with abortion the other direct attacks on the sanctity of human life is human cloning and the murdering of human embryos for research.  The dignity of life must be honored in every decision made.  It is not honored when life is reduced to human cloning and or genetic engineering to create “perfect” human beings as if that were possible.  Every human life has the right to human decency.    DOCUMENT OF THE HOLY SEE ON HUMAN CLONING  1) The Holy See is convinced of the need to support and promote scientific research for the benefit of humanity. Thus, the Holy See earnestly encourages investigations that are being carried out in the fields of medicine and biology, with the goal of curing diseases and of improving the quality of life of all, provided that they are respectful of the dignity of the human being. This respect demands that any research that is inconsistent with the dignity of the human being is morally excluded. 2) There are two potential sources of stem cells for human research, firstly “adult” stem cells, which are derived from the umbilical cord blood, the bone marrow and other tissues and secondly “embryonic” stem cells, which are obtained by the desegregation of human embryos. The Holy See opposes the cloning of human embryos for the purpose of destroying them in order to harvest their stem cells, even for a noble purpose, because it is inconsistent with the ground and motive of human biomedical research, that is, respect for the dignity of human beings. However, the Holy See applauds and encourages research using adult stem cells, because it is completely compatible with respect for the dignity of human beings. The unexpected plasticity of adult stem cells has made it possible to use this type of undifferentiated, self-renewing cell successfully for the healing of various human tissues and organs, (1) particularly in hearts damaged after myocardial infarction. (2) The multiple therapeutic achievements that have been demonstrated using adult stem cells, and the promise they hold for other diseases, such as neurodegenerative disorders or diabetes, make efforts to support this fruitful avenue of investigation an urgent matter (3). Above all, it is universally agreed that the use of adult stem cells does not entail any ethical problems. 3) By contrast, research using human embryonic stem cells has been hampered by important technical difficulties (4). Embryonic stem cell experiments have not yet produced a single unqualified therapeutic success, not even in animal models (5). Moreover, embryonic stem cells have caused tumor in animal models (6) and might seed cancer if administered to human patients (7). Unless these grave hazards are removed, embryonic stem cell experiments would not have any clinical application (8). Technical problems aside, the need to extract these cells from living human embryos raises ethical questions of the highest order. 4) The so-called “therapeutic cloning”, which would be better called “research cloning” because we are still far from therapeutic applications, has been proposed in order to avert the potential immune rejection of embryonic stem cells derived from a donor other than the host. However, the use of cloned embryonic stem cells entails a high risk of introducing cells from abnormal embryos into patients. It has been well established that most of the non-human embryos produced through nuclear transfer cloning are abnormal, with a deficiency in several of the genes (imprinted and non imprinted) necessary to the development of the early embryo. (9) Embryonic stem cells harvested from abnormal and unfit embryos will carry their “epigenetic defects” and transmit at least part of them to their daughter cells. The transfer of such cloned embryonic stem cells into a patient would be therefore extremely hazardous: these cells might provoke genetic disorders, or initiate leukemia or other cancers. Moreover, a non-human primate model of cloning, which would be necessary in order to conduct experiments to establish safety before attempting therapeutic experiments in human beings, has yet to be developed (10). 6) Scientists, philosophers, politicians, and humanists agree on the need for an international ban on reproductive cloning. From a biological standpoint, bringing cloned human embryos to birth would be dangerous for the human species. This asexual form of reproduction would bypass the usual “shuffling” of genes that makes every individual unique in his/her genome and would arbitrarily fix the genotype in one particular configuration, (12) with predictable negative genetic consequences for the human gene pool. It would also be prohibitively dangerous for the individual clone. (13) From an anthropological standpoint, most people recognize that cloning is offensive to human dignity. Cloning would, indeed, bring a person to life, but through a laboratory manipulation in the order of pure zoo technology. This person would enter the world as a “copy” (even if only a biological copy) of another being. While ontologically unique and worthy of respect, the manner in which a cloned human being has been brought into the world would mark that person more as an artifact rather than a fellow human being, a replacement rather than an unique individual, an instrument of someone else’s will rather than an end in himself or herself, a replaceable consumer commodity rather than an unrepeatable event in human history. Thus, disrespect for the dignity of the human person is inherent in cloning. The whole document can be found: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretariat_state/2004/documents/rc_seg-st_20040927_cloning_en.html   We have become a society that wants to “live forever” or at the very lease prolong life as long as one is able.  When society thinks its wisdom trumps God’s wisdom it is, there that pride that tells us we can do anything.  We do not see the cost of such thinking or the end result.  Pride makes us believe we are far superior than the One who created us and gave us life.  As society advances we forgot from Who we came from and our direction.  Why is this because as our “wisdom” forgets humility and our hearts have left God.     I leave you with this passage from 1Cor 3:18-23 to meditate on:    18 Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you considers himself wise in this age, let him become a fool so as to become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own ruses,” 20 and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.” 21 10 So let no one boast about human beings, for everything belongs to you, 22 Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world or life or death, or the present or the future: all belong to you, 23 and you to Christ, and Christ to God. May The Hearts of Jesus and Mary Bless You. DEDICATE:  To Human Dignity.

The Five Non-Negotiable When Voting Part II

                             

The second non-negotiable one cannot vote for is the one running for political office who is for Euthanasia.  One would be surprised that euthanasia is widely practice in the health care industry and for many reasons far from compassion. 

 

I am a retired nurse the steps leading to euthanasia is not the suffering of the patient.  It usually begins with the fact a patient may not have a very good medical health plan.  The ordering of tests are based on one’s health plan coverage and if it is willing to sustain the cost of the test.  The life and death of a patient is determined first on the money aspect, which includes weather long-term nursing care is warranted for the less medically covered.  If you are indigent and no family to advocate your care, you are at the mercy of those who see money first and life as a burden to society.  These judgments are made by one who have no stake in the life in their care but for the fact, everything comes down to money.  How is euthanasia carried out to keep within the color of the law simple it is called a slow code.  What is a slow code it is when a code blue is called for one in distress and all who are to answer the code take their time in getting to the patient and administering CPR.          

 

This is the teaching of the Catholic Church on Euthanasia for its Catechism:

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.

Thus, an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of “over-zealous” treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such, it should be encouraged.

Although euthanasia is not the law of the land, this is the standing of the states on this issue:   

ASSISTED SUICIDE LAWS STATE BY STATE

Currently, 35 STATES have statutes explicitly criminalizing assisted suicide :

Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin

NINE states criminalize assisted suicide through common law:

Alabama, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia

THREE states have abolished the common law of crimes and do not have statutes criminalizing assisted suicide :

North Carolina, Utah, Wyoming

In Ohio, that state’s Supreme Court ruled in October 1996 that assisted suicide is not a crime.

In Virginia, there is no real clear case law on assisted suicide , nor is there is a statute criminalizing the act, although there is a statute which imposes civil sanctions on persons assisting in a suicide.

Only Oregon permits physician- assisted suicide.

Source: Associated Press. Provided by Infonet List is a daily compilation of pro-life news and educational information.

Any state touting any form of Assistant Suicide Law or Dying with Dignity is espousing an intrinsic evil that goes against the moral life.  To vote for someone that espouses the taking of life under the guise of misplaced compassion that is non-negotiable and is a grave sin.  Less we forget the plight of Terry Schiavo the murdering of this precious soul. 

I would like to touch on one more thing be careful when filling out a Living Will.  One cannot be sure what will happen during medical crises…with medicine advancing in leaps and bounds the Living Will, will override your receiving a life saving treatment or medication because of the dictates of the Living Will.  Keep your wants broad.  As Christians, we cannot specify no food or water this is starvation and consider suicide. 

One is entitled to be protected under the law and all the rights of having dignity of life.

May the Hearts of Jesus and Mary Bless You. 

DEDICATED: Terry Schiavo. 

Copyright 2008 Linda Mary Liotino   

 

 

 

The Five Non-Negotiable When Voting

Part I

If no one has figured it out yet I am a Catholic Christian and I write from the faith I know and love.  Therefore, this Blog is to my brother and sisters of the Catholic Faith but what I am to say can be the belief of many other Christian Faiths.  Since I am not well verse on other faiths, I cannot be sure but if this will help, anyone making the awesome decision on whom to vote for this might help.

 

As Catholic’s we have five non-negotiable when making the decision where we will be casting our vote.  Four pertain to human dignity and they are:

ABORTION

EUTHANASIA

EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH

HUMAN CLONING

The fifth one is on marriage it is:

MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN

 

This list came from Catholic Answers and since there is allot of information on all five I will Blog this in five parts starting with the teachings ..ion.   According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I submit this teaching on abortion:

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life. ⁷²

Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you. ⁷³

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth. ⁷⁴

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish. ⁷⁵

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes. ⁷⁶

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,“ ⁷⁷ “by the very commission of the offense,” ⁷⁸ and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. ⁷⁹ The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

“The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.” ⁸⁰

“The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined…. As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights.” ⁸¹

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual…. It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.” ⁸²

The Unborn are to be afforded all the rights and dignity of any human being from the moment of conception.  The law of the land profoundly wrong is no excuse for anyone to use this as a justification of the murdering of the Unborn or excuse oneself because it is the law of the land.  The law of the land should be lined up with the moral law but in this case sorrowfully so it is not. All Christians are obligated to follow the moral law first.  Nothing comes before the dignity of life NOTHING.  This includes war, economy, healthcare, environment and the list goes on.  We cannot put anything before the life of another and must be willing to suffer the consequences until such time the Unborn is afford the same rights and privileges that all human beings have under the law.  We must stand toe and heel with the Unborn anything less is not acceptable.  We must be willing to do without until these Precious Ones are afforded their rights under the law.  We can no longer let this atrocity go on for another thirty-five years.  We cannot let it go on for another month.  We must hold those elected officials already in office feet to the fire and accountable for the dignity of the Unborn.  We must from this election .. voting for anti life politicians.  We must in all we do be unselfish and seek to uphold the dignity of the Unborn.  We must clear out the Congress of all whom do not uphold the rights of the Unborn.  Our vote is our power and we must begin to be more prudent on how we cast it and well informed on who is saying what.  We cannot sit on our hands, silence our words, or make excuses for doing nothing.  This is not the time to be silent for to be silent and do nothing makes us complicit to the intrinsic evil of abortion. 

 

May the Hearts of Jesus and Mary Bless You.                                         

 

DEDICATED:  To the ones who fight for the Dignity of Life.

Copyright 2008 Linda Mary Liotino