Name an organization that adheres to Biblical doctrine and that isn't afraid of controversy

[Boojatta]

Last edited Wed Feb 22, 2012, 11:29 PM - Edit history (2)

I thought of one: the Westboro Baptist Church. However, there are probably others. Can you name one?

Suppose that somebody goes to them and says ...

Do you agree that I am commanded to love my fellow human beings as I love myself?

Suppose that they say, "Yes."

Do you agree that greater love than this no person has: that said person lay down his or her life for others?

Suppose that they say, "Yes."

Now we arrive at what I suspect would be a stumbling block:

Do you agree that there is a shortage of organs and that there's a good chance that I can save the lives of at least two people by allowing my vital organs to be harvested while I am still alive and in good health? In other words, the organs would not merely provide minor benefits to others, but would save their lives.

I suspect that many people who work at institutions that adhere to Biblical doctrine will deny knowing anything about this, and claim that if it isn't in the Bible then they aren't interested and will refuse to either research the matter or listen to the results of research performed by others.

Anyway, here are my questions for you:

1. What legal issues, if any, would arise if a religious institution facilitated such a harvesting of organs? Note in particular that the individual whose organs are harvested approaches the religious institution, that the religious institution itself offers no inducement or compensation whatsoever to the individual, and that the people who receive the organs don't pay anything for the organs.

2. Does the Westboro Baptist Church include not merely lawyers, but also members who are licensed to administer anesthetic and perform surgery?

3. Is there reason to be concerned that this kind of event would improve the reputation of the Westboro Baptist Church, and that such improvement of its reputation would cancel out any benefit provided to people who needed the organs?

[Angry Dragon]

1. .............................

[cleanhippie]

2. What kind of controversy?

[dimbear]

3. Coming to you from the Mecca of the West, I offer you:

http://orderofabsu.webs.com/

They thrive on controversy.

[customerserviceguy]

4. It would be completely unethical

for a doctor to remove organs from a healthy person whose life would be imperiled by such removal, even to give to a dying person, or a group of them. It's a ridiculous hypothetical that you pose.

[Boojatta]

5. How do you arrive at the conclusion ...

that it would be completely unethical?

In the Bible, there's a command to love others, and a statement that greater love than this no person has: to lay down his or her life for others.

In my hypothetical, the healthy person requests the removal of his or her organs, and authorizes the doctor to remove the organs.

[customerserviceguy]

6. Screw the bible

Can you possibly conceive of any existing medical ethical code developed with reason rather than religion in mind that would countenance what you suggest?

You do illustrate that anyone can twist any set of words from a holy book any way they want to, and that's what the tens of thousands of religions on this planet have done so very well.

[Boojatta]

7. This is the Religion Group.

The connection between the Original Post and the Bible makes it possible for this issue to be discussed here rather than in a forum where threads get a larger number of knee-jerk responses and are then archived so that no thoughtful resumption of the discussion is possible unless a new thread is started.

Can you possibly conceive of any existing medical ethical code developed with reason rather than religion in mind that would countenance what you suggest?

I think that the above question that you asked deserves a considered answer, and I don't think that I'm ready to answer it. However, I could begin a thought process that might eventually make some contribution to constructing a good answer.

Some potential starting points:
1. What medical ethical codes exist?

2. How, as a matter of historical fact and/or conjecture, have ethical codes developed? For example, has religion influenced any of them?

3. Could there be criteria for determining whether or not some ethical code was developed with reason in mind? I mean criteria that wouldn't rely upon information about past events that led to the precise content of the ethical code, but would judge only the ethical code itself.

can twist any set of words from a holy book any way they want to,

I think that I took the words at face value. If there is to be twisting or contortions, then I suspect that most or all of the twisting will come from people who simultaneously claim that the Bible should be taken very seriously and that the proposal in the Original Post of this thread is in obvious conflict with "common sense" and can be simply dismissed out of hand on the grounds that it is "silly."

[Boojatta]

8. Kick to encourage people to formulate their thoughts and post replies