Reviews | How the Whole Life movement challenges left-vs-right politics

Over the next 20 years, the population of people with dementia will double. In 30 years, it will triple. So what concerns me deeply is that if we are already treating people, especially people with advanced dementia, in this way with the resources that we have chosen to devote to it now, what will that look like it when this population will double or triple?

We really need a complete overhaul of our elder care system, our vision of human dignity and the resources we are willing to devote to it. We are going to have to massively increase our resources for elderly care and dementia care if we are to meet this moment. And I’m afraid that if we don’t have the changes that we’ve been talking about in this interview with respect to human dignity, we’ll either head into what’s called “robotic care,” where we imagine that an algorithm can cure for someone, which is ridiculous, or simply, no hunter euthanasia. So the stakes couldn’t be higher for us to get it right and move our view of human dignity in a very different direction.

What about people who hear you and say, “Well, we can’t really know what makes someone a person or when life begins or ends, and your ideas that all humans are people basically equal in human dignity are only yours. personal religious convictions, so it is an individual choice. What would you say to people who say it’s mostly personal religious beliefs and can’t affect politics in America?

On some level, of course, it’s not just about religion, because a significant part of the whole life movement and pro-life movements are not religious people. I recommend to your readers the group Secular pro-life like just one of many examples of that.

But on another level, I don’t like the religious/secular binary when it comes to ethics. Everyone—regardless of your claims to the transcendent, to God, and to organized religion—has irreducible first principles, fundamental goods that you don’t have because of arguments. If you just go down and try to lower all your values, you will eventually come to something that you believe in simply because you believe in it, because of intuition or some other kind of authority. And sometimes it contradicts the opinions of others.

But I don’t think we’re saying to the laity, “Oh, you can’t use your first principles or core values ​​to try to work for justice, say, to impose a view of the good on others who think differently. If you care about justice, you care about imposing it on others. The whole point of things like the anti-slavery movement or the civil rights movement was to say, “We have this view of the good and we’re here to impose it on those who think differently.” This is what justice demands.

How do you plan to find common ground on some of these issues with people who may not share your point of view?

About Norman Griggs

Check Also

Canada’s Invisible Euthanasia Plan – BC Catholic

Winning journalism awards always gives a boost this time of year, but two of the …