Be forewarned…
The following is a species of contrarian thinking and argumentation. If this sort of thing bothers you, it is probably better if you elect to simply pass it by. If not, you may want to grab a bottle of antacid or simply take a look and enjoy, depending on your disposition.
Over the weekend, one of our friends sent us information that the Idaho State legislature has passed, and the Governor has signed, “a bill to license and regulate Certified Professional Midwives…”. Ok, fine. But my question is why are we rejoicing over this?
Let me offer an explanation of my disenchantment with this whole business.
First of all, you can mark me as one who is more than slightly dissatisfied with the medical establishment as it exists today. For example, if we were still having babies and determined with sound counsel that there were no acute health problems involved, we would choose a midwife to assist us in a home birth. Our selection of a midwife would be based on character, skill, reputation, compassion, and other similar criteria. It would have nothing at all to do with whether she had the approval of the state. Licensure by the state has nearly nothing to do with the competency of the practitioner. If it did, our present system would not be the dysfunctional mess that it is. Has licensing of medical practitioners stopped all malpractice? No. Is it likely to do so? No. Why do medical doctors have to carry very expensive malpractice insurance if such licensing has created the degree of safety that the proponents of such systems claim?
What other areas of such state based certification have produced the positive results claimed? Have licenses to operate motor vehicles eliminated the problems of drunken driving, carelessness, or road rage? Has contractor licensing eliminated shoddy and sub-standard housing? Has the licensing of firearms dealers eliminated even one murder? Why in the world, then, would we rejoice over subjecting another honorable and historically durable practice under the supervision and regulation of the state? When does the licensing and regulation of drawing life giving breath begin? Will we be more safe and secure when it is implemented? Have we become so dependant on, and bought into, the “security” offered by the idol-state that we can’t see our way out of the forest any more? God forbid!
Some may want to argue that this is an incremental improvement over the situation where the practice of midwifery was considered criminal. Well, perhaps. But only in a small degree. Consider what has been given up in the transaction. Remember, the state may now, by virtue of this legislation, regulate the practice of midwifery. Do you think that claim innocuous? Think again.
Also, consider our track record on our supposed “advancements” utilizing incrementalist notions. The debate over abortion has devolved to an argument over stem cell research and “partial birth” abortions, not the criminalization of these murderous practices. The dialogue about sodomy has devolved into a battle over whether perverts can “marry”, not whether sodomy is a punishable, criminal action. Folks rejoice over the fact that they are now allowed, by permission of the state, to exercise their right to carry a firearm to protect themselves, all the while providing the state with an almost fool proof means to determine who possesses such items whenever they deem it necessary to revoke that “privilege”. Where, in all of this, is the victory? I am not denouncing incrementalism per se here. I would simply challenge us to consider which direction the benefit of these transactions has actually gone. I do, however, denounce our inherent dependence on the state for such things. We need a new way of thinking.
Is God everything He declares in the Bible? If so, then we need to develop (or perhaps more correctly, redevelop) a way of thinking and life practice that indicates that we do, in fact, believe His declarations.
The following is a species of contrarian thinking and argumentation. If this sort of thing bothers you, it is probably better if you elect to simply pass it by. If not, you may want to grab a bottle of antacid or simply take a look and enjoy, depending on your disposition.
Over the weekend, one of our friends sent us information that the Idaho State legislature has passed, and the Governor has signed, “a bill to license and regulate Certified Professional Midwives…”. Ok, fine. But my question is why are we rejoicing over this?
Let me offer an explanation of my disenchantment with this whole business.
First of all, you can mark me as one who is more than slightly dissatisfied with the medical establishment as it exists today. For example, if we were still having babies and determined with sound counsel that there were no acute health problems involved, we would choose a midwife to assist us in a home birth. Our selection of a midwife would be based on character, skill, reputation, compassion, and other similar criteria. It would have nothing at all to do with whether she had the approval of the state. Licensure by the state has nearly nothing to do with the competency of the practitioner. If it did, our present system would not be the dysfunctional mess that it is. Has licensing of medical practitioners stopped all malpractice? No. Is it likely to do so? No. Why do medical doctors have to carry very expensive malpractice insurance if such licensing has created the degree of safety that the proponents of such systems claim?
What other areas of such state based certification have produced the positive results claimed? Have licenses to operate motor vehicles eliminated the problems of drunken driving, carelessness, or road rage? Has contractor licensing eliminated shoddy and sub-standard housing? Has the licensing of firearms dealers eliminated even one murder? Why in the world, then, would we rejoice over subjecting another honorable and historically durable practice under the supervision and regulation of the state? When does the licensing and regulation of drawing life giving breath begin? Will we be more safe and secure when it is implemented? Have we become so dependant on, and bought into, the “security” offered by the idol-state that we can’t see our way out of the forest any more? God forbid!
Some may want to argue that this is an incremental improvement over the situation where the practice of midwifery was considered criminal. Well, perhaps. But only in a small degree. Consider what has been given up in the transaction. Remember, the state may now, by virtue of this legislation, regulate the practice of midwifery. Do you think that claim innocuous? Think again.
Also, consider our track record on our supposed “advancements” utilizing incrementalist notions. The debate over abortion has devolved to an argument over stem cell research and “partial birth” abortions, not the criminalization of these murderous practices. The dialogue about sodomy has devolved into a battle over whether perverts can “marry”, not whether sodomy is a punishable, criminal action. Folks rejoice over the fact that they are now allowed, by permission of the state, to exercise their right to carry a firearm to protect themselves, all the while providing the state with an almost fool proof means to determine who possesses such items whenever they deem it necessary to revoke that “privilege”. Where, in all of this, is the victory? I am not denouncing incrementalism per se here. I would simply challenge us to consider which direction the benefit of these transactions has actually gone. I do, however, denounce our inherent dependence on the state for such things. We need a new way of thinking.
Is God everything He declares in the Bible? If so, then we need to develop (or perhaps more correctly, redevelop) a way of thinking and life practice that indicates that we do, in fact, believe His declarations.
No comments:
Post a Comment