Moral questions!

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnycatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

johnnycatholic

Guest
I just watced John Q. and some question’s came to me.
  1. If your child needs heart surgery and no one will help is it morally acceptable to hold a hospital hostage at gunpoint and force them to save your child?
    It seems to me that the hospital in refusing to help becomes an unjust aggressor and thus the violent action is justified. My only qualm wit that however is that it implies a right to healthcare which i’m not sure we have.
    2)In another scene the main character is going to kill himself to provide a heart for his son. To me this seems akin to jumping in front of someone to take a bullet for them. Giving up your life to save another. Though this seems to conflict with the principal that you cannot directly take an innocent life to save another.
    Any thoughts?:rolleyes:
 
I saw this movie too, some time ago.

While the story is, of course, contrived, it is only a slight exaggeration of the organ donation and reception process.

I do not think the protagonist was morally justified is taking hostages. However, I personally think masturbation would be a more grave sin given the circumstances the movie presented.

His attempt to commit suicide to donate hi heart to his son is even more problematic. I think that would be a moral evil. God is to decided when it is time to take the child. Comitting suicide to provide an organ for someone, even your own child would be a serious evil. Sort of like contraception in reverse.
 
The movies do a great job of putting a moral face on evil acts in order to make the hero look wonderful. The movie makes attacking the evil hospital staff for not operating on his son or his committing suicide to provide a heart for his son look reasonable, moral…

Now for the real world…

Suicide is a mortal sin

Assaulting innocent people to achieve your ends…is simply evil.

If you follow this line of thinking to its logical conclusion…chaos would rule.

Iowa Mike
 
The movies do a great job of putting a moral face on evil acts in order to make the hero look wonderful.
Right on. I always liked Michael O’Brien’s rating system. It was made for books but it certainly apply to any media. The ratings are:
  1. The movie is wholly morally good.
  2. The movie is fundamentally morally good, but with problems.
  3. The movie is fundamentally morally bad, but appears good.
  4. The movie is wholly morally bad.
It would seem like John Q. is the 3rd option. In many ways these are worse than category 4 because they are deceptive.

Scott
 
They blew their cover at the end, though, when they had Bill Maher and Arianna Huffington advocating for John Q. and universal health care.
Anyway, it’s too bad they weren’t Catholic. We have patron saints for such things.
 
His attempt to commit suicide to donate hi heart to his son is even more problematic. I think that would be a moral evil. God is to decided when it is time to take the child. Comitting suicide to provide an organ for someone, even your own child would be a serious evil. Sort of like contraception in reverse.
Now for the real world…

Suicide is a mortal sin
Assaulting innocent people to achieve your ends…is simply evil.
If you follow this line of thinking to its logical conclusion…chaos would rule.

Iowa Mike
I Agree that this would be immoral, but let me play devils advocate. I think there is something to learn from working this out.
Could this act not be compared to that of someone taking a bullet for someone else or jumping on a grenade to save someone or some other act that would result in his death and the potential saving of someone else?
Or could the principal of double effect come into play here as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy?
Is this really a suicidal act on the fathers part?
I also wonder if his duty to serve his family would come into play in this instance.
 
johnnycatholic,

“Greater love than this no man hath than to lay down his life for his friends”.

Jesus laid down his life for us but he didn’t commit suicide. There is a big difference between what Jesus and the solder did verses what the man in the hospital is doing.

If I follow your logic re: serving the interests of the family there may be other circumstances that might make suicide permissable:
  • Commit suicide for insurance proceeds to provide financially for the family or a sick family member.
  • Commit suicide when terminally ill to ease the financial and emotional burden on the family
  • Commit suicide to assure delivery of a baby
Deliberate suicide interferes with God’s plan for us and is never acceptable. In fact suicide is described as the most selfish act in the world because the consequences of the act on family, friends and society is never considered by the person who kills themself, they only consider their own needs.

A solder doesn’t go into combat with the expectation of getting killed or the intention of committing suicide. If he gets killed while defending his comrads in arms, I seriously doubt it is something that he planned.

I don’t think the Church supports abortion even to save the life of the mother. However, if it is clear that the pregnancy will not result in the birth of a child, then surgical intervention to save the mother is permitted.

I’m seriously concerned about the impact of Hollywood on young people when they paint evil deeds as morally acceptable.

Where am I going wrong?

Iowa Mike
 
It has been a while but if I remember correctly, the father was found guilty of a lesser crime and punished with a lite sentence. This I think was perfect. It showed that there was great understanding for the sitaution and sympathy was given out. However, even though the father’s intentions were good there still had to be some consequences.
 
I don’t think the Church supports abortion even to save the life of the mother. However, if it is clear that the pregnancy will not result in the birth of a child, then surgical intervention to save the mother is permitted.
That is correct and let me add the detail that while we may treat the mother and even give her priority treatment with the expectation that the infant will die, at no time may the treatment involve deliberately and directly killing the infant.

Scott
 
Hello Johnny Catholic,

Here is a biblical story which may help you with your question.

NAB 2MC 7:1 Martyrdom of a Mother and Her Sons.

It also happened that seven brothers with their mother were arrested and tortured with whips and scourges by the king, to force them to eat pork in violation of God’s law.
One of the brothers, speaking for the others, said: What do you expect to achieve by questioning us? We are ready to die rather than transgress the laws of our ancestors. At that the king, in a fury, gave orders to have pans and caldrons heated. While they were being quickly heated, he commanded his executioners to cut out the tongue of the one who had spoken for the others, to scalp him and cut off his hands and feet, while the rest of his brothers and his mother looked on. When he was completely maimed but still breathing, the king ordered them to carry him to the fire and fry him. As a cloud of smoke spread from the pan, the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die bravely, saying such words as these: “The LORD God is looking on, and he truly has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his canticle, when he protested openly with the words, ‘And he will have pity on his servants.’
When the first brother had died in this manner, they brought the second to be made sport of. After tearing off the skin and hair of his head, they asked him, “Will you eat the pork rather than have your body tortured limb by limb?” Answering in the language of his forefathers, he said, “Never!” So he too in turn suffered the same tortures as the first. At the point of death he said: “You accursed fiend, you are depriving us of this present life, but** the King of the world will raise us up to live again forever. It is for his laws that we are dying.**”
After him the third suffered their cruel sport. He put out his tongue at once when told to do so, and bravely held out his hands, as he spoke these noble words: “It was from Heaven that I received these: for the sake of his laws I disdain them.” Even the king and his attendants marveled at the young man’s courage, because he regarded his sufferings as nothing.

After he had died, they tortured and maltreated the fourth brother in the same way. When he was near death, he said, “It is my choice to die at the hands of men with the God-given hope of being restored to life by him; but for you there will be no resurrection to life.
They next brought forward the fifth brother and maltreated him. Looking at the king, he said: “Since you have power among men, mortal though you are, do what you please. But do not think that our nation is forsaken by God. Only wait, and you will **see how his great power will torment you and your descendants. **”
After him they brought the sixth brother. When he was about to die, he said: “Have no vain illusions. We suffer these things on our own account, because we have sinned against our God; that is why such astonishing things have happened to us. Do not think, then, that you will go unpunished for having dared to fight against God.”

Most admirable and worthy of everlasting remembrance was the mother, who saw her seven sons perish in a single day, yet bore it courageously because of her hope in the LORD. Filled with a noble spirit that stirred her womanly heart with manly courage, she exhorted each of them in the language of their forefathers with these words: “I do not know how you came into existence in my womb; it was not I who gave you the breath of life, nor was it I who set in order the elements of which each of you is composed. Therefore, since it is the Creator of the universe who shapes each man’s beginning, as he brings about the origin of everything, he, in his mercy, will give you back both breath and life, because you now disregard yourselves for the sake of his law.”

Antiochus, suspecting insult in her words, thought he was being ridiculed. As the youngest brother was still alive, the king appealed to him, not with mere words, but with promises on oath, to make him rich and happy if he would abandon his ancestral customs: he would make him his Friend and entrust him with high office. When the youth paid no attention to him at all, the king appealed to the mother, urging her to advise her boy to save his life.

continued:
 
**continued from above post: **

NAB MAT 16:24

Jesus then said to his disciples: “If a man wishes to come after me, he must deny his very self, take up his cross, and begin to follow in my footsteps. Whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. What profit would a man show if he were to gain the whole world and destroy himself in the process? What can a man offer in exchange for his very self? The Son of Man will come with his Fathers glory accompanied by his angels. When he does, he will repay each man according to his conduct.”​
**NAB MAT 10:28 **

“Do not fear those who deprive the body of life but cannot destroy the soul. Rather, fear him who can destroy both body and soul in Gehenna.” /INDENT

NAB 2MC 7:26 After he had urged her for a long time, she went through the motions of persuading her son. In derision of the cruel tyrant, she leaned over close to her son and said in their native language: “Son, have pity on me, who carried you in my womb for nine months, nursed you for three years, brought you up, educated and supported you to your present age. I beg you, child, to look at the heavens and the earth and see all that is in them; then you will know that God did not make them out of existing things; and in the same way the human race came into existence. Do not be afraid of this executioner, but be worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that in the time of mercy I may receive you again with them.” **NAB HEB 11:35 **

Women received back their dead through resurrection. Others were tortured and would not receive deliverance, in order to obtain a better resurrection.​
NAB 2MC 7:30 She had scarcely finished speaking when the youth said: “What are you waiting for? I will not obey the king’s command. I obey the command of the law given to our forefathers through Moses. But you, who have contrived every kind of affliction for the Hebrews, will not escape the hands of God. We indeed, are suffering because of our sins. Though our living LORD treats us harshly for a little while to correct us with chastisements, he will again be reconciled with his servants. But you, wretch, vilest of all men! do not, in your insolence, concern yourself with unfounded hopes, as you raise your hand against the children of Heaven. You have not yet escaped the judgment of the almighty and all-seeing God. My brothers, after enduring brief pain, have drunk of never-failing life, under God’s covenant but you, by the judgment of God, shall receive just punishments for your arrogance.” “Through me and my brothers, may there be an end to the wrath of the Almighty that has justly fallen on our whole nation.” At that, the king became enraged and treated him even worse than the others, since he bitterly resented the boy’s contempt. Thus he too died undefiled, putting all his trust in the LORD.
 
We are to place our trust in God. IF He desires to save our children from a bad heart or whatever He will make it happen. If we kidnap or do injury to ourselves or to others to try to save our child we are placing trust in ourselves or in an imperfect medical team.

Pray for deliverance for your son or loved one. place your faith in God, and IF it is His will, He will deliver your loved one from harm far better than any medical team.
 
I haven’t seen the movie. A heart transplant is not a treatment to which anyone would have any entitlement. It is an extraordinary treatment, not routine medical care. Even if it were considered routine medical care, there would be more potential patients desiring it than available hearts. No one has a right to someone else’s organs. Nor do we have a right to kill–not even ourselves–to obtain an organ.
 
.Could this act not be compared to that of someone taking a bullet for someone else or jumping on a grenade to save someone or some other act that would result in his death and the potential saving of someone else?
No. This might be equivalent to someone jumping onto a grenade that was not engaged and then pulling the pin. The difference is that the act itself by intention results in death. In the other circumstances (such as “taking a bullet”) death is not directly intended but is a consequence of the intended action (preventing someone else from being shot).
. Or could the principal of double effect come into play here as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy?
Again, no. The double effect does not allow the evil result to be the direct intent of the action.
. Is this really a suicidal act on the fathers part?
Yes. There are many reasons why people commit suicide. That does not make it right.
. I also wonder if his duty to serve his family would come into play in this instance.
Duty to family would come in to play in the father’s desire to do something, but there are limits to what the father is required (or allowed) to do from a moral perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top