The word engineering never stops, does it? When radical policies are proposed, the first step is to change the lexicon to make it seem less extreme, even mundane.
The scientific method and the crafting of public policy requires open scientific discourse. But these days, that is in increasingly short supply. The science establishment is more dedicated to stifling those who dissent from policy orthodoxies.
The chronic shortage of organs for transplantation has some bioethicists supporting unethical curatives, such as doing away with the dead-donor rule, allowing organ procurement to be not only paired with euthanasia — already being done in Canada, Belgium, and the Netherlands — but also used as a means of euthanasia, and even allowing healthy people to consent to donating their vital organs.
The “international world order” is increasingly radical in its environmental engagement and anti-human in the policies it promotes. In the great cause of “saving the planet,” scientific precepts and empirical analyses are being cast aside in favor of a neo-earth religious mysticism.
Mere legalization of euthanasia is never enough. Eventually, efforts will be made to compel dissenting doctors and institutions to become complicit in the killing of sick patients — even if it violates constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion.
Gender ideologues keep pretending that laws limiting so-called gender-affirming care for children — such as puberty-blocking, mastectomies, and facial-reconstruction surgeries — are based on hate for transgender people and only supported by reactionaries. Such assertions are both wrong as to motive and false as to fact.
When ideologues and the media insist that puberty blocking is the only appropriate care for children with gender dysphoria, don’t believe it. The studies have been few and far between, and there are many potential physical-health harms to children — such as infertility and poor bone development.
COVID-19 mandates and lockdowns opened the door. Now, the medical establishment is redefining our most contentious political controversies as “public health emergencies” so as to circumvent public resistance and impose policies on society unobtainable through normal democratic means.
The science and medical journals have become highly ideological on many of the most important and contentious societal issues of the day, ranging from global warming to gender ideology, to critical race theory, to virtually everything woke.
We supposedly live in an era of “evidence-based medicine,” in which medical decisions are guided by the published data. But that approach is now being criticized because the “best evidence” is often in the eye of the beholder.
In the end—as with so many of our societal controversies—the legal parameters of what constitutes acceptable treatment of these unfortunate gender-confused children will be another social hot potato decided by the nine justices of the Supreme Court. I’ll bet they can hardly wait.
Gender ideology is growing increasingly extreme, particularly as it applies to children. Now, we are being told that children can identify as one gender on “top” and another on the “bottom,” or can be half boy and half girl.
The CDC should add “aid in dying” to its suicide statistics and include that category of people who should receive prevention services. Doing otherwise will only make our suicide tragedy even worse going forward.
Today is my 76th birthday," the letter began. "Unassisted and by my own free will, I have chosen to take my final passage." Suicide. My friend Frances died in a cold, impersonal hotel room after taking an overdose of sleeping pills, with a plastic bag tied over her head suffocating the life out of her body.
Clearly, the science is not settled. That being so, the responsible approach for the AAP would have been to call for a moratorium on GAC pending further inquiries. But a half step is better than nothing.
Banks seem to be shutting down the accounts of conservatives for no apparent reason other than ideological disagreement, and Chase Bank might be the worst offender.
The “anything goes” ethical peril in biotechnology is real. The need for a serious discussion about this and other such experiments such as CRISPR germ-line genetic engineering is more urgent than ever. But I suspect the crickets will keep chirping.