OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Individual Morality

Entry 243, on 2005-11-01 at 14:36:09 (Rating 3, News)

I listened to an interview this morning, with a doctor who refused to prescribe birth control drugs to his patients because of his Catholic background. He has also refused to help his patients get abortions for several years. I don't have a lot of time for religious beliefs, and I think Catholicism is largely a load of superstitious nonsense, but after considering it for a while I think I support his right to take this stand.

Some people will say its his duty as a doctor to use whatever medical interventions are available to help his patient. But who defines these duties, and whose to say whether this duty involves any genuine morality? Also, who decides what is "good" for the patient? Usually the patient herself, but in many cases that might not be valid because of the mental state, or lack of knowledge, of the patient.

Personally I think everyone should have access to contraceptives (I'm not so sure about abortion), but that's just a personal opinion. I'm not saying my opinion is right. As long as the patient can go to another doctor then I think the individual doctor should follow their own morality.

Of course its got to end somewhere. What if the doctor supports euthanasia? Is it OK for them to kill the patient? The more these issues are looked at, the more confusing it becomes. No wonder so many people want to follow an artificial absolute morality, such as that stated by different religions! Unfortunately, that also leads to problems because of interpretation of religious texts, contradictions in the texts, and the lack of change in the rules to allow for changing social customs and technological factors.

Comment 1 (151) by N on 2005-11-17 at 18:53:06:

I dont understand the position of that Catholic doctors that don't want to give people contraceptives. I wish to know if they dont practice sex except for procreate.

Comment 2 (152) by OJB on 2005-11-17 at 18:53:36:

Good point. I'd be tempted to suggest a certain amount of hypocrisy, except I don't know the details of the case. All the Catholics I know basically ignore the no contraceptives rule.

Comment 3 (159) by SL on 2005-12-21 at 12:26:42:

To answer N's question, Catholic teaching states that sex must be within marriage and open to life. There is nothing wrong with not procreating, the golden rule is that it always must be open to life and then that that life is to be allowed to live. That's pretty much it.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.