For the French secular state, the attack by the country’s Catholic hierarchy comes close to a declaration of war.
For two decades, the country’s Muscular Dystrophy Foundation has run a wildly popular annual telethon to raise money for medical research.
Indeed, the 30-hour fund-raiser, which opens Friday night at the Trocadéro esplanade in Paris and will be shown on national television, is expected to surpass the record of more than $138 million dollars set last year.
But this year, the French Catholic Church has sullied the reputation of the initiative, calling its funding of research on embryonic stem cells immoral.
But the separation of church and state is an unshakable pillar of the French Republic, and the verbal attacks by the French Catholic hierarchy have been met with sharp resistance.
Both government officials and the leaders of the French medical establishment made clear that the church has no business interfering in matters of state, especially when they involve a practice that is legal.
“It’s not up to the church to put any pressure on families who have recourse to genetic diagnoses, and even less to make the totality of donors feel guilty,” said Manuel Valls, a deputy in Parliament and mayor of Evry, the suburb of Paris where the Muscular Dystrophy Association is located.
I wish the pillars of our own Republic were as unshakable.
In other news the French surrender to the Catholic Church.
So we’re being told that the church has no place in addressing ethical issues?
Just dump their “morality” into the same bin as all the other politics left over from the Dark Ages. Their track record at governing deserved to end a couple centuries ago. Well, maybe more than a couple.
The Church has just as much right to have a position on an issue and make that opinion known as anybody does. Is it just that more folks listen to their opinion than yours what pisses you off?
[to continue]
People have been criticizing the churches for not opposing the Nazis enough. So which logic do they wish to use? The church shouldn’t set moral policy, or it should?
Governments are not known to be moral bastions. Here in the US, we have prisoners without due process, and, well, we don’t torture people of course, but we do use stressful interrogation techniques. Some countries seem to be using assassination to get rid of troublesome former spies or to eliminate terrorists or electricians without any due process. Does France think that by making things legal it makes them right?
#2 — only in your own paranoid mind. No one here has suggested that at all. They (and you) have a perfect right to be as backwards as you wish in your opinions.
#4 — have you considered reading what has been written in the article or commented here? You have a legitimate right to believe in the tooth fairy or whatever silliness you prefer — and the international tooth fairy church may offer opinions. Whoop-de-doo.
#5 — most criticisms of the French and Italian Catholic churches had to do with their collaboration with Nazis — not a question of opposition. The rest of your fixations are far enough OT to ignore.
#1, obviously the French government hasn’t surrendered to the Catholic Church. Though I see a few Defenders of the Faith, here, who would have them do so.
My fear is the same as many. That is, that our own government is perfectly willing to place the definition of ethics and law into the guidance of priests and demagogues. We’re capable of better than that and have been so for centuries.
#7 – a prerequisite for a rational world view is that it be consistent. M. Valls suggests that the church should not criticize an activity if the activity is legal. A sufficient counterargument is to show that there are legal activities that one has an obligation to criticize. I believe most people can come up with such example.
As for the #6 comment, “Both government officials and the leaders of the French medical establishment made clear that the church has no business interfering in matters of state, especially when they involve a practice that is legal.” What these people are saying is that the church has no business interfering in what the church thinks is this ethical issue. That’s obvious from the statements.
In order to be able to argue rationally, one has to be able to look at what’s really being said and to apply it in a context larger than just the specific issue at hand.
So, Jim, how long have you been writing copy for politicians?
Nobody is angry at the church for voicing its moral opinion. We’re irate because we believe their statements are immoral, just as they consider ours to be. If someone walked up to you and said they thought crashing planes into WTC was moral, you would probably be shocked and offended. Same effect.
They have a right to voice their moral opinion.
And I have a right to call their views inhumane, ignorant, and unethical. They have yet to answer to those accusations.
why stop with stem cells? Remember the Monty Python skit “every sperm is sacred”? Shouldn’t these religious busybodies go around saving, I don’t know, unfertilized eggs (collect used tampons), and used comdons, etc. Maybe then they could move onto collecting hair from barber shops, old nail filings, … the list is endless.
#11 – It is a rational perspective (correct or not) to say the ideas of the church are wrong. The thing that bugged me is that the people quoted are indicating that the church should stay out of this because these are not matters to which the church should speak.
#12 – a legitimate question which I can’t answer. For me it’s pragmatic; fertilization represents a change of kind, whereas all other dates are changes of degree. Of course, if you ask “why stop with stem cells” (blastocysts, I assume), one could also take it the other way; why not newborns, etc.
Then the catholics should just leave France.
@12 The catholic church already has a position on that.
Your not suppose to masterbate and thats maybe the logic behind it.
Your suppose to go to confession and whisper in the dirty old priests ears all the times you have masterbated.
Sickening and dispickable religion.
12 – The church protects this belief because life begins at conception. This is the point in which all of the necessary ingredients are present in one location, and if properly cared for (you know where), will continue to develop into a baby (read human). Sperm and eggs in and of themselves will not make that transition. Which is why the moment of fertilization is considered the starting point.
16- Whether or not you agree with other tenants of the Catholic religon, they have at least defended the sanctity of human life when other religions (and denominations within Christendom) have sought to devalue and destroy it. ….and what has your hatred of religon done for you today?