"The logical complementarity of the human sexes has been so recognized in our culture that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming various pipe fittings either the male pipe fitting or the female pipe fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other. When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and disease may occur as noted above. Therefore, based on the simplest known anatomy and physiology, when dealing with the complementarity of the human sexes, one can simply say, Res ipsa loquitur - the thing speaks for itself!"
-James W. Holsinger Jr., in a paper concerning the "detrimental health effects" of homosexuality.Currently the nominee for the Surgeon General of the United States of America.
James W. Holsinger Jr., albeit trained in some of the most pre-eminent schools for medicine, has been a staunch contributor to the anti-gay rhetoric spewed by the conservative medical community. As a current, standing member of the National Methodist judicial community, he has not only voted in support of a Methodist pastor who kept a gay member from attending his church, he also voted in 2004 to expel a lesbian clergy member from the Methodist community.
Most disturbingly, Holsinger founded the Hope Springs Community Church, which “ministers to people who no longer wish to be gay or lesbian.” Holsinger has publically stated that homosexuality is “an issue not of orientation but of lifestyle.” (the Lexington Herald-Leader via Think Progress.org)
Although I may disagree with certain fundamentalist aspects of many religions, I can't dictate what entire religions should or should not accept. However: Science and Religion, though in history once enjoyed a mutually prosperous communion, no longer work in a beneficial harmony. Instead, religion has been used to dictate what answers science is allowed to give.
By it's very nature, science has no final answers. It only has the best answer out of what is available. Science is a tool to examine our world, and further explore different and unique ideas.
Religion, by it's own nature, seeks to give absolute answers to questions about our lives and our universe. By the same token, it is rare that religions are fluid and changing with the times, updating and re-adressing central beliefs based on new evidences and discoveries. In fact, whereas science in a dynamic and self-correcting process, religion often seeks to be stable, permanent, and unchanging through the external pressures of a changing universe. Religion looks to the past for strength, science pulls towards the future.
So how can religion be used to dictate what "answers" are given in matters of science? Should Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc., be an editting tool in how we read medicine?
I would maintain that this is always a bad idea. Our own personal bias's always phrase what we say and how we say it. Yet the more knowledge we have, the more truth we gain: so what can possibly be gained from an additional voice censoring what is heard?
That is not to say that morals and ethics have no place in science. Medicine should have no opinion. It is what it is. Doctor's, the appliers of medicine, are the driving force which should use humanity and honesty to guide treatment... but how far? To what end?
Reagrdless of what the answers are to that debate, I genuinely don't like Holsinger, and to speak to political incestuality:
"Holsinger has been a consistent contributor to the Republican Party, according to Newsmeat.com. The web site lists close to $17,000 in contributions to the national party and to various candidates, including President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, both fellow United Methodists, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)." - Cynthia B. Astle, United Methodist Nexus
No comments:
Post a Comment