The Nazi Plan

This is part 3 of my thoughts from The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Jay Lifton (click here to see it on Amazon.com)  Click here to read part 2.

In order to rid the Volk of this disease, Dr. Lifton identified five distinctive steps in the Nazis process (21):

  1. Coercive sterilization of those deemed less “desirable”
  2. The killing of “impaired” children in hospitals
  3. The killing of “impaired” adults in centers especially equipped with carbon monoxide gas
  4. The killing of “impaired” inmates of concentration and extermination camps
  5. Mass killings in the extermination camps

Most people that I’ve related these five steps outlined here are repulsed by the thought that any government would sanction these actions. But of course, we’re doing it today in the U.S. I’ll make the connections for you in subsequent posts but I’ll start here with Step 1: Coercive sterilization.

Many states in the U.S. had passed forced sterilization laws in the early 1900’s. Some of these states kept enforcing these laws into the 1970’s. Read recent news articles about the eugenic past of the U.S. by clicking here to read about forced sterilization in North Carolina or clicking here to read about forced sterilization in Washington.

The difference between Nazi Germany and the rest of the world was that the Nazis went on to steps 2-5 and the rest of the world didn’t, or did they?

Stayed tuned to see how we kill “impaired” children today. (Click here to read part 4.)

Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, Part 2

This is part 2 of my thoughts from The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Jay Lifton (click here to see it on Amazon.com)  Click here to read part 1.

The inculcation of genocide into the medical professional’s psyche was methodical. It began with dehumanizing the perceived “enemy” of the state: the Jews. Lifton wrote: “At the heart of the Nazi enterprise, then, is the destruction of the boundary between healing and killing” (14). He then recounts a discussion between a survivor physician and a Nazi doctor (15ff):

But there is another perspective on medicalized killing that I believe to be insufficiently recognized: killing as a therapeutic imperative. That kind of motivation was revealed in the words of a Nazi doctor quoted by the distinguished survivor physician Dr. Ella Lingens-Reiner. Pointing to the chimneys in the distance, she asked a Nazi doctor, Fritz Klein, “How can you reconcile that with your [Hippocratic] oath as a doctor?” His answer was, “Of course I am a doctor and I want to preserve life. And out of respect for human life, I would remove a gangrenous appendix from a diseased body. The Jew is the gangrenous appendix in the body of mankind.”

Isn’t that exactly what we have today in the abortion industry? In fact, abortion and abortifacients are often sold to the public as “women’s healthcare” because the easiest way to get people to support what you want is to tell them that you’re trying to help them. By calling abortion and abortifacients a part of women’s healthcare a wall is built so that those who are pro-abortion care for women and those who are against abortion do not care for women.

But the reality in Nazi Germany was the leaders, the perpetrators of the ideology, didn’t want to help anyone but themselves and those that were caught up in it (the doctors) didn’t even realize what had happened to their view of reality.

Click here to read about the five identifiable steps to the Nazi plan in part 3.

Updated July 16, 2012.

The Depths of Grieving

C.S. Lewis expressed the depths of his grieving in A Grief Observed (see it here in Goodreads). In a way, I can empathize with him in that I, too, did not find love until later in life but his marriage was brief as cancer took his wife within a few years. And he took it hard. Lewis could not fathom the goodness of God that would bring such love into his world and then, just as abruptly, snatch that love from him. From the book (25ff):

Talk to me about the truth of religion and I’ll listen gladly. Talk to me about the duty of religion and I’ll listen submissively. But don’t come talking to me about the consolations of religion or I shall suspect that you don’t understand.

Unless, of course, you can literally believe all that stuff about family reunions ‘on the further shore,’ pictured in entirely earthly terms. But that is all unscriptural, all out of bad hymns and lithographs. There’s not a word of it in the Bible. And it rings false. We know it couldn’t be like that. Reality never repeats. The exact same thing is never taken away and given back. How well the spiritualists bait their hook! ‘Things on this side are not so different after all.’ There are cigars in Heaven. For that is what we should all like. The happy past restored.

And that, just that, is what I cry out for, with mad, midnight endearments and entreaties spoken into the empty air.

And poor C. quotes to me. ‘Do not mourn like those that have no hope.’ It astonishes me, the way we are invited to apply to ourselves words so obviously addressed to our betters. What St. Paul says can comfort only those who love God better than the dead, and the dead better than themselves. If a mother is mourning not for what she has lost but for what her dead child has lost, it is a comfort to believe that the child has not lost the end for which it was created. And it is a comfort to believe that she herself, in losing her child or only natural happiness, has not lost a greater thing, that she may still hope to ‘glorify God and enjoy Him forever.’ A comfort to the God-aimed, eternal spirit within her. But not to her motherhood. The specifically maternal happiness must be written off. Never, in any place or time, will she have her son on her knees, or bathe him, or tell him a story, or plan for his future, or see her grandchild.

Oh, what must the post-abortive woman be thinking when I walk up to her and say, “Be of good cheer, your sins are forgiven” and my implication: “Now stop grieving over your child and move on.” She smiles politely and nods, all the while thinking that I don’t understand. And I don’t, not exactly. I can empathize in part with my lost fatherhood, that’s something I’ll never experience with children of my own. But that’s not the same as lost motherhood, and that’s not the same as a woman who aborted her child. All I can offer is the Word of God and pray that the Comforter gives her the peace that surpasses all understanding.

Through the Lord’s mercies we are not consumed,
Because His compassions fail not.
They are new every morning;
Great is Your faithfulness.
“The Lord is my portion,” says my soul,
“Therefore I hope in Him!”
The Lord is good to those who wait for Him,
To the soul who seeks Him.
It is good that one should hope and wait quietly
For the salvation of the Lord.
Lamentations 3:22-26 (NKJV)

If you are experiencing the effects of an abortion decision in your past, please contact Option Line or call 800.712.HELP.

Click here to read the next part of my thoughts on my observations from this book.

The Coming “E” Battle

This is Part 2 of my observations from the 2nd International Symposium on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide recently held in Lansdowne, Virginia.  Click here to read Part 1, Assisted Suicide in the United Kingdom.

I’d like to bring you the story of Lionel Roosemont and his wife Renate. Lionel is a husband and father of four from Belgium.  He talked about the culture of death in that country and how his family has had to deal with the implications of that paradigm. It should be noted that euthanasia is legal in Belgium.

When Renate was in the 7th month of pregnancy with their 4th child, she felt something was wrong. They went to their local clinic where doctors told them that the baby had hydrocephalus. The doctors immediately advised that Renate get an abortion because the baby would probably not live long after birth. The doctors told the Roosemonts that the baby will most likely be blind, deaf, and paralyzed. Although Lionel and Renate kept asking the doctors for other options, they were continually told that an abortion was the only answer.  Lionel and Renate refused to end the baby’s life.  However, they did begin preparing for the baby dying shortly after birth.  They chose the name Tikvah for their daughter, which means “jewel.” Fully prepared for her death, Lionel was surprised when the doctor came into the waitng room to tell him that the baby was doing fine and scored between 9 and 10 on the Apgar tests.

Although Tikva has significant disabilities, the family loves her and cares for her; she has brought much joy and love into their lives.  Lionel said, “People who cannot accept that we live in a less-than-perfect world will have problems with children like Tikva.” He noted that currently there is pending legislation in Belgium that would legalize euthanasia for minors and infanticide (as the Netherlands have had since 2006). There are also moves to force hospitals to perform euthanasia.

In the 13 years since Tikva was born strangers, after seeing Tikva’s condition or hearing her cry uncontrollably as she sometimes does, have repeatedly come up to the family (even to the other children) and stated that it would be better to just give her an injection so she will die.

Lionel also talked about “the weekend clean-up” that often occurs in Belgian hospitals.  He stated that when the socialized medicine program in Belgium can no longer afford to cover a patient’s treatment, doctors often “help” some of those patient to die. Lionel said that the family never leaves Tikva in the hospital alone in fear of what someone may do to her.Remember Belgium Enlist Today

Lionel stated, “Once the beast of euthanasia is released, the future looks bleak.” He concluded with a little family history.  Lionel’s father had fought in World War II at Dunkirk and with the Belgian Underground.  His father and two uncles were captured and put into a Nazi concentration camp. Only his father survived the war.

“Are you ready for the coming ‘E’ battle?” was the question Lionel asked the attendees. He challenged us to remember “Little Belgium” as we did during World War I when the free world came to the aid of Belgium. Now the battle he asks us to fight for is “life”; not only for Belgians, but for ourselves as well.

Click here to read the final part from the symposium, The State of the States.

The China Model

It would seem that other countries are following the China model for abortions: don’t like the gender of the baby, go ahead and end its life.  Click here to read this short article about Sweden and how its National Board of Health and Welfare recently decided that abortions based on the gender of the baby are NOT illegal.  In fact, the board noted that any request for an abortion up to the 18th week of pregnancy cannot be refused, no matter what the reason for the abortion.  This article reminds us of the importance of the conscience protection regulations currently in place in protecting American medical practitioners from being forced to do anything contrary to their beliefs and values. See Freedom 2 Care’s website to write President Obama and Congress to keep in place regulations that protect our medical professionals.

For me, the disturbing undercurrent of all the talk is this: what kind of world do we live in when “the right to choose” [insert: gender-based abortions, infanticide, or eugenics] is so revered that it is not only allowed, but encouraged by governments? Isn’t it bad enough that China has coerced abortions and many are performed due to the gender of the baby, but now other nations want to follow that model as well? In fact, nations around the world that outlaw abortions are being targeted by pro-abortion organizations to relax their laws – recent examples include the Dominican Republic and East Timor.

When will the people of this nation and of other nations stand up and speak for the most vulnerable of our societies? When will we clearly state that the “right to choose an abortion” really means the “right to kill another human being”? And when will we finally understand what Martin Luther wrote in the Large Catechism about the 5th Commandment–You shall not commit murder:

…under this commandment not only he is guilty who does evil to his neighbor, but he also who can do him good, prevent, resist evil, defend and save him, so that no bodily harm or hurt happen to him, and yet does not do it. …[I]f you see any one innocently sentenced to death or in like distress, and do not save him, although you know ways and means to do so, you have killed him. (LC, Part I, 189-190)

It is not enough to just say “I’m personally opposed to abortion, but it should be legal for those who want the “right to choose”.  We need to speak for those who are innocently sentenced to death (1.2 million every year in America, 41.6 million every year worldwide) and protect all human life, no matter the size, degree of development, or location of that human life.