Political ideology as a substitute for religion

 

Politics has become a substitute for religion and ‘social justice warriors’ are today’s Puritans, a new BBC documentary claims.

Helen Lewis, who was raised Catholic but is now an atheist, has produced a new documentary for BBC Radio 4 in which she explores the thesis that contemporary social justice movements have the same characteristics that used to be typical of religion.

As she explains in an article for the Atlantic magazine, with the decline of organised religions, “we might expect that religious concepts—repentance, hellfire, heresy, apostasy—would have become less salient as a result. But that’s not the case. For some activists, politics has usurped the role that religion used to play as a source of meaning and purpose in our lives, and a way to find a community.”

She thinks that human being always long for shared values, for a sense of belonging and for meaning. Many young people might find all this in ‘social justice movements,’ which is to say, in left-wing or environmental activism, more than in churches, but there striking similarities between the new and old orthodoxies.

Taking the knee to fight racism, for instance, is a direct inheritance from religious celebrations. Announcing your pronouns is a ritual that “shows allegiance to a common belief, reassuring a group that everyone present shares the same values”, she says.

Lewis claims that social justice groups are not necessarily more inclusive or respectful of differences. They have inherited not only the positive elements but also the worst characteristics of religion, such as intolerance and prejudice.

“I know a lot of LGBTQ+ young people who say it’s harder to come out as Christian in an LGBT space than LGBT in a Christian space”, a cleric of the United Reformed Church, one of the most liberal Christian denominations, told Lewis. The minister identifies as ‘gender non-binary’.

Helen Lewis notes that “treating politics like a religion also makes it more emotionally volatile, more tribal (because differences of opinion become matters of good and evil) and more prone to outbreaks of moralizing and piety.”

A fundamentalist fervour pervades the public presence of social justice warriors, she claims. Those who do not conform to the new orthodoxy are ‘burnt’ as heretics on social media or cancelled from public life.

Lewis is correct, even if her thesis is not particularly original. The same was often observed about the secular ideologies of the 20^th century by philosophers like Eric Voegelin. It is true that human beings are always searching for truth and meaning. We are also ritualistic; our values are embodied in collective symbolic actions and recurring celebrations.

We have a deep desire for something that transcends our daily lives and politics can become an attempt to find salvation in this world, rather than in the next.

The BBC documentary proves that human nature doesn’t really change: religion is an essential part of what we human beings are, even when if it can find new forms.

Liberals still ignore the fact that family structure matters

In England in 2021, for the first time a majority of births took place outside marriage. In Ireland, the figure is now above 40pc.

Covid-19 might have contributed to those figures, as many couples have delayed their plans to marry during the pandemic while they continued to have children, but the trend is clear: the percentage of births outside of marriage has grown constantly since the 1970s. It was 11.8 in 1980, 28.3 in 1990 and 39.5 in 2000.

In Ireland, last year 41.4pc of all births were registered outside marriage. A substantial increase when compared to the year 2000 (31.5pc) or 1990 (14.6pc).

Some might say that this is a purely private matter, but it’s not true, because family structure is important and the evidence remains that children tend to fare best when raised by their own two, married parents.

According to new figures from the Office for National Statistics, in 2021, 51.3pc of births were to unmarried parents compared to 49pc in the previous year.

Covid-19 might have contributed to those figures, as many couples have delayed their plans to marry during the pandemic while they continued to have children, but the trend is clear: the percentage of births outside of marriage has grown constantly since the 1970s. It was 11.8 in 1980, 28.3 in 1990 and 39.5 in 2000.

In Ireland, last year 41.4pc of all births were registered outside marriage. A substantial increase when compared to the year 2000 (31.5pc) or 1990 (14.6pc).

Marriage is a social institution, with a specific role, and the family structure children are born in and raised should be everyone’s concern.

The main social purpose of marriage is to give children a mother and a father who are publicly committed to their family. Marriage is a child-centred institution and study after study show that children do best when they are raised by their married parents.

Marriage adds stability to the family, compared with cohabitation, and therefore it is good from the point of view of children welfare.

This much is borne out again by a recent study from the British-based Centre for Social Justice (CSJ)  called ‘Family Structure Still Matters’.

It refers to the British Millennium Cohort Study (MCS), which followed the lives of 19,000 young people in the UK. The study shows that children born to cohabiting parents were far less likely to be living with both their parents by the time they were 5 years old, compared with children born to married parents.

This has an effect on children. As the CSJ reports says: “Children of married parents displayed the lowest rates of cognitive delay; the highest rates were found in children of stepfamilies. MCS children who had experienced family structure change had lower cognitive assessment indicators and higher behaviour problems at age 5, compared to those who had not”.

It continues: “Children model behaviours they observe, and challenging conduct may correlate with experiencing disrupted attachment and regular conflict in the home.  …. Compared to children living with married parents, children who lived in other family types, including other stable families, were more likely to display externalising behavioural problems at age 5, even after adjustment for a range of socio-economic, demographic and health factors. Income, a common explanation for this difference, interestingly bore no correlation with behaviours.”

The issue of family structure is now completely neglected by liberals despite the evidence that it matters. Children born outside of marriage tend to perpetuate the family structure they have experienced themselves, and this has long-term consequence on society.

“Parents are children’s first role models. Their relationship is the template children will copy. Boys who grew up with a single parent or who experience multiple transitions have a substantially higher likelihood of becoming fathers early, are less likely to marry and are particularly likely to become non-resident fathers.”, says the Centre for Social Justice.

Liberals don’t want to confront the consequences of their overemphasis on adult autonomy despite the detrimental consequences this can have for children, but the growing number of children born outside marriage should be everyone’s concern. They prefer to ignore this inconvenient fact instead.

Archie Battersbee case was not black or white

 

The recent case of Archie Battersbee, who had his life support machine turned off after a long legal battle and against the wishes of his parents, raises questions on whether and when it is morally permissible to do this, and who should decide.

The 12-year-old boy suffered brain injury while at home in London, in April, and he was soon declared “brain-dead”. The family contested this diagnosis but after six hearings in different UK courts, a decision of the European Court of Human Rights and even the intervention of a UN Committee, last week the judges ordered the ventilation to be withdrawn.

The main difficulty in Archie’s case was to establish whether he was already dead. The very concept of “brain stem death”, which is not defined in the UK common law or statutes, was disputed in court. (The Christian Legal Centre, which helped Archie’s family, explain well the technical difficulties of such definition here)

There are cases when it is morally permissible, in certain circumstances, to switch a person’s life-support machine off. Each case should be addressed in its individual merits but there are some general ethical principles to take into consideration.

The first principle is that death should be never intentionally procured. It is always wrong to kill patients or facilitate their suicide, and this is the reason why euthanasia and assisted suicide are always morally wrong.

On the other side, it is morally permitted, and sometimes even required, to withdraw or withhold a treatment when it is futile or harmful, even if the unintended consequence is the acceleration of the death of the patient. A treatment should always be proportionate and foremost in the interest of the patient.

In other words, there is no moral duty to artificially prolong the life of a terminal patient whose cerebral functions are irreversibly lost.

The final decision should involve the medical professionals, the family, and also the patients if they are in the condition to express their opinion or have given instructions in advance.

Even when death is inevitable, the interest of others involved, particularly parents and siblings, has to be taken into consideration as they also need time to come to terms with their tragic loss.

In the case of Archie Battersbee, the judges acknowledged that he was not in pain and he had previously expressed a wish to be kept on life support if found in such circumstances, but they still deemed that this was not in his best interest. This ruling led to a harsh dispute between the courts and his family, which wished for their child what they considered a more dignified death, “in God’s time, in God’s way”.

Archie’s case is the latest in a long list of similar situations where health authorities have come into conflict with the wishes of a child’s parents, and the courts have ruled against the parents.

The Anscombe Bioethics Centre denounced “a systematic lack of respect in English law for the role and responsibilities of parents in such cases”. 

They have accused the British medical and judicial establishment of a peculiar form of paternalism, which is not seen in other countries, for not taking expressions of a wish to receive treatment and live with the same seriousness as they take expressions of a wish not to receive treatment.

The Anscombe Bioethics Centre has called for changes in the law and a government review to avoid further conflicts between the parents and hospital authorities.

Over 10,000 Canadians died by euthanasia last year

Over 10,000 Canadians died by euthanasia in 2021, 32pc more than in the previous year, according to a new official report. It shows once more that when you open the door to euthanasia and assisted suicide, the numbers availing of them rise rapidly and social norms change. It’s worth look at the report in some detail, because it provides a window into what might happen here in the future.

A figure that stands out is that 36pc of those who died by euthanasia said they perceived themselves to be a ‘burden’ to their family, friends or caregiver. More than 1,700 said they suffered from ‘isolation’ and ‘loneliness’. A compassionate country offers something better to the sick and lonely than death by gas or injection.

Canada introduced euthanasia and assisted suicide for terminally ill people in 2016 and then the grounds for them rapidly expanded.

The total number of those who availed of ‘medical assistance in dying’ (to use the euphemism) since its introduction in 2016 up to the end of last year now stands at 31,664.

The figure for last year represents a tenfold increase compared to 2016 (1,018) and accounted for 3.3pc of all deaths in Canada. There are geographical variations but in British Columbia almost one in every 20 deaths occurs by euthanasia.

The law allows assisted suicide in the form of self-administration of lethal drugs but this happens rarely. There were only seven such cases in 2021. Almost all patients are directly killed by a doctor or a nurse (that is, by euthanasia). The majority (52.3pc) of them were men. The total average was 76.3 years, 77 for women and 75.6 for men.

Legislative changes in 2021 extended euthanasia to individuals for whom ‘natural death was not reasonably foreseeable’. They might have a non-terminal but incurable illness and be far from natural death. They could suffer from a disability or else experience psychological or physical suffering. This is very broad-ranging indeed.

A total of 219 individuals who availed of euthanasia fell into this category. As euthanasia has been available to the non-terminally ill only since June 2021, the figure in the report covers only half of the year, and the number of such deaths will likely double next year and then rise from there.

The average age of non-terminal patients who were euthanised was 70.1, six years lower than the average terminal patients. 37pc of non-terminal deaths occurred in the 18-64 age cohort. 

The most commonly cited source of suffering, for all sort of patients, was the loss of ability to engage in meaningful activities (86.3pc). More than 3,500 said they perceived to be a burden to the family, friends or caregiver and more than 1,700 suffered isolation and loneliness. 

The term natural deaths that are ‘not reasonably foreseeable’ requires a bit of unpacking. You might say that the natural death of an elderly person with a chronic illness is ‘reasonably foreseeable’, but they are not terminally ill as such. Such a person would qualify for euthanasia. The 219 people whose natural deaths were not ‘reasonably foreseeable’ were presumably years away from natural death, but they were able to avail of euthanasia anyway.

Only 4pc of the requests for euthanasia were refused because of ineligibility, while about 2pc withdrew their request.

The most common underlying medical condition among terminally-ill patients was cancer (65.6pc) while for non-terminal patients it was neurological (dementia or Alzheimer).

The report does not offer details of the socio-economic characteristics of the patients but we know from other reports – Oregon for example – that white and university educated people are over-represented.

Canada proves that the slippery slope is real and once euthanasia and assisted suicide are introduced, the eligibility criteria expand with time and also the numbers tend to grow.

Adorare

 “Quando gli uomini abbandonano l’adorazione di Dio e dei santi prendono ad adorare se stessi. L’Io si presta ottimamente a questo culto perché il proprio Io è un modello di perfezione, e soprattutto non è possibile metterne in dubbio l’esistenza. Il culto di noi stessi ha il grande vantaggio di essere culto di qualche cosa che certamente esiste, la cui presenza è certa, a portata di mano e, per noi, oggetto di sconfinata ammirazione. Ma adorare, per la natura stessa dell’atto, significa pagare un tributo, che deve necessariamente rivolgersi a un oggetto esterno. Il culto di noi stessi non può dunque attuarsi che in una forma riflessa. La forma più corrente di questo culto è quella che ha per suo oggetto l’umanità. Dal culto dell’umanità ci vengono religioni come quella del Socialismo, della Fratellanza Universale, del Credo della Bontà Universale e simili.”

Hilaire Belloc (1870 – 1953), Saggio sull’indole dell’Inghilterra contemporanea (An Essay on the Nature of Contemporary England,1937)