Letting Your Conscience Be Your Guide

Excellent column from Craig Westover today, “Rx for Conscience Clauses.” These clauses in state laws allow individuals or institutions to opt out of providing (or paying for) medical services on the basis of religious or moral beliefs.

Craig’s take is a response to Ellen Goodman’s column on the same topic and is, as always, calm and well-reasoned. One of the highlights for me was his observation on the irony of the state “granting” these rights:

Bottom line, morality is always an individual choice. “Conscience clauses” are good things, but it is ironic that the state passing a conscience clause restores to individuals the right to exercise moral judgment that government never had the authority to take away in the first place.

Hospital Blogging This Week

Blogging might be light and/or sporadic this week as my father is going into the hospital for a couple of heart procedures. The risk appears to be relatively low and we are confident in an excellent outcome.

I’ll be crossing a couple of states in order to be there with my family, however, and the travel and the opportunity to enjoy having the whole family together will push blogging down on the “to do” list.

I do have a few items queued up, however, that I might be able to get to if I find myself with time on my hands, and friends and family interested in following my father’s condition can check here for updates (as long as I’m not violating any HIPAA regulations, that is).

Application to Date My Daughter

Some readers may have gathered that I have a teenage daughter. A few days ago I posted my theories on dating and requirements for friendship. The reactions I’ve had from this post – and ensuing discussions – have reminded me of something that Joe Soucheray read on his great Garage Logic radio program several years ago: his “Application to Date my Daughter.”

I’d love to link you this useful and intriguing document, but it doesn’t appear to be on the Garage Logic site any more. I did, however, have the foresight to download this years ago for future reference and I include it here as a follow up to my previous post and in appreciation for the great job Mr. Soucheray does. If dating were an option for my daughters, this application would be the one I’d use.

I repeat – I did not write the following; I only wish I had. (Format altered to fit this blog, but text is as it originally appeared.)


“This is the end – but for me, the beginning of life.”

Those were not the words of Pope John Paul II, but of German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, executed 60 years ago today by the Nazis in the closing days of World War II.

I thought of these words this week as the world honored the Pope and I listened to commentators in every media try to put their political spin on what a life of faith should look like. And when I thought of their words in the context of this anniversary, I could only shake my head at the subtleties of God and offer a bitter smile. Bitter at the foolishness and presumption, but a smile nonetheless in order to share in the laugh God must have been having.

Bonhoeffer is one of my heroes. Supremely talented and perceptive, he saw spiritual truth in a clear light and threw himself into writing it down and vigorously living it out in total commitment to the lives of those around him, yet he was also capable of the loneliest touch of inner doubt. He was one of the earliest and most unyielding voices in opposition to Hitler as far back as 1933 and struggled to shine a light on Hitler’s co-opting of the German church and to reconstruct Christian ethics.

Fearing for Bonhoeffer’s life, his friends arranged a position for him in America ahead of the coming war, only to have him turn around and return to Germany almost immediately, saying:

I have made a mistake in coming to America. I must live through this difficult period of our national history with the Christian people of Germany. I will have no right to participate in the reconstruction of Christian life in Germany after the war if I do not share the trials of this time with my people.

A pacifist, he ultimately saw the need to try and throw a spoke into the wheel of the Nazi war machine and was arrested in 1943 and accused of being part of a plot to kill Hitler. Over the next two years Bonhoeffer wrote prodigiously and powerfully, cramming each paragraph with stunning clarity and revelation almost as if he sensed his time was short (he was 39 – younger than I am now – when he died). As he watched the German church crumble around him and embrace the unbiblical tenets of Nazism, he exhorted his followers and his country that obedience and belief were bound together, saying “Only he who believes is obedient, and only he who obeys, believes.”

You can find out much more about his incredible and courageous story here on the pages hosted by the United States Memorial Holocaust Museum, but let me return to the present and the spirit of our age so much in evidence the past few weeks, and what Bonhoeffer might wryly refer to as another example of

“the vigilant religious instinct of man for the place where grace is to be obtained at the cheapest price.”

What he meant was that we all too easily fall into iniquity by trying to determine for ourselves and by our own standards what pleases God. Today there is a lot of easy talk about spirituality as we boomers age and find that our first commandment – “Love thyself” – doesn’t sustain. Christian or otherwise we seek to set our own standards for what is “good enough,” forgetting what it cost those who came before us to raise God’s standard. Journalist David Brooks calls it “building a house of obligation on a foundation of choice,” or, “orthodoxy without obedience.”

You can be thought to be spiritual merely for acknowledging there is a need for spirituality without admitting that you have any responsibility to live up to it in any way. It is a spirituality that honors teachers but not a Messiah. It is what Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace” and described as being the greatest threat to the Church. The threat, however, wasn’t from the world but rather from within the Church.

The complacency of cheap grace allowed Nazism to subvert the gospel in the German church, and the spiritual complacency of America in the 50s and 60s germinated the seeds that bear so much bitter fruit in our culture today. (Btw, you might find it an interesting study to compare the origins, thinking and actions of the original Nazis with the origins, thinking and actions of those who are the first to label others as Nazis today.) It is this “cheap grace” with which we try to cover a multitude of sins while projecting a rich aura of tolerance and enlightenment. As Bonhoeffer wrote in his classic, “The Cost of Discipleship”:

This is what we mean by cheap grace, the grace which amounts to the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sin departs. Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves.

Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without Church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without contrition. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the Cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will gladly go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble, it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows Him.

Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must be asked for, the door at which a man must knock.

Such grace is costly because it calls us to follow, and it is grace because it calls us to follow Jesus Christ. It is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life. It is costly because it condemns sin and grace because it justifies the sinner. Above all, it is costly because it cost God the life of His son: ‘ye were bought at a price,’ and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us. Above all, it is grace because God did not reckon His Son too dear a price to pay for our life, but delivered Him up for us. Costly grace is the Incarnation of God.

In what I have read of the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and – though I am not a Catholic – what I have seen in the life of Pope John Paul II, I sense they both understood that their own lives were not too dear a price to pay for the sake of future generations. As Bonhoeffer wrote in one of his letters from prison:

“The ultimate question for a responsible man to ask is not how he is to extricate himself heroically from the affair, but how the coming generation shall continue to live.”

Notes: For anyone interested in gaining a deeper sense of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s life and vision I highly recommend “The Cost of Discipleship” and “Letters and Papers from Prison” as a start (don’t expect to rush right through these, however). “Ethics” and “Life Together” go further into what a thriving life in the spirit and in fellowship with others is about for those who want more. There are also two excellent DVDs available. Especially moving is “Hanged on a Twisted Cross,” surprisingly and effectively narrated by Ed Asner and Mike Farrell, and the very polished “Bonhoeffer” from Martin Doblmeier.

Whoops! I Told You That Was Slippery!

Shot in the Dark and Bogus Gold have posts today about another feeding tube that’s been pulled. If that sounds familiar – please note that the woman in this case, 81-year-old Mae Magouirk, is not considered terminal, is not in a persistent vegetative state or comatose, AND has a living will that says she does not want to be starved and dehydrated if she is not in such a condition.

85 year-old Mae Magourik (note: I’ve confirmed through other sources that the correct spelling of the last name is Magouirk. NW) of LaGrange, Georgia, is currently being deprived of nutrition and hydration at the request of her granddaughter, Beth Gaddy. Mrs. Margourik suffered an aortic dissection 2 weeks ago and was hospitalized. Though her doctors have said that she is not terminally ill, Ms. Gaddy declared that she held medical power of attorney for Mae, and had her transferred to the LaGrange Hospice. Later investigation revealed that Ms. Gaddy did not in fact have such power of attorney. Furthermore, Mae’s Living Will provides that nutrition and hydration are to be withheld only if she is comatose or vegetative. Mae is in neither condition. Neither is her condition terminal.


Furthermore, under Georgia law, if there is no power of attorney specifying a health care decisionmaker, such authority is given to the closest living relatives. Mae’s brother, A. B. McLeod, and sister, Lonnie Ruth Mullinax, are both still alive and capable of making such decisions. They opposed Mae’s transfer to hospice, and are fighting to save her life. But in spite of the lack of a power of attorney, and the fact that there are closer living relatives who should be given precedence by Georgia law, Ms. Gaddy sought an emergency appointment as guardian from the local probate court. The probate judge, Donald Boyd (who, I am told, is not an attorney and does not have a law degree), granted Gaddy’s request, thereby giving her the power to starve and dehydrate Margourik to death, though such an action is contrary to the provisions of the living will.

By the way, the thought crossed my mind that this might be a kind of urban legend “leaked” to get the blogosphere stoked in an effort to discredit blogging. I checked back through the many threads in different blogs on this story and found most of it was one blog repeating what another blog said (like what I did with Shot in the Dark and Bogus Gold). Since the case takes place in Georgia, I looked up the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and didn’t find any mention of the story. The April 8 issue of the LaGrange News – the local newspaper in the city where Mae Magouirk’s hospice is located – does feature the following (read the entire story):



Woman, 81, at center of feeding tube feud
Kenneth Mullinax, the patient’s nephew in Birmingham, Ala., said a hospice nurse told him that Magouirk had not received substantial nourishment since March 28. He wants a temporary feeding tube inserted until she can be evaluated for treatment at the University of Alabama Medical Center. A living will states that nourishment should be withheld only if she were in a coma or vegetative state with no hope of recovery.


Mullinax and the patient’s brother and sister – Lonnie Ruth Mullinax of Birmingham and A.B. McLeod of Anniston, Ala. – came here last Friday to arrange for a feeding tube and take her to the Birmingham hospital. That same day Gaddy received emergency guardianship in Troup County Probate Court.


At a follow-up hearing Monday, the parties reached a settlement that awarded guardianship to Gaddy provided three cardiologists – James Brennan and Thomas Gore, both of LaGrange, and Raed Aquel of Birmingham – evaluate the patient, who would receive whatever treatment two of the three recommended. A final decision had not yet been reached.


“They were all hugging necks when they left court,” said Probate Judge Donald Boyd. “I don’t know what happened.”


Boyd said Gaddy testified at the hearing that she feeds her grandmother Jello, chips of ice and “anything else she’d be willing to eat”


“I think all of Mrs. Magouirk’s family has her genuine best interests at heart, but unfortunately they disagree on what they believe would be best for her,” said Jack Kirby of LaGrange, attorney for the patient’s brother and sister.


“She (Gaddy) said, ‘I think it’s time she (her grandmother) goes home to Jesus, that’s she’s too sick and would not have a good quality of life,” Kenneth Mullinax said.

It’s 2005. Do You Know Where Your Social Security Benefits Are?

My wife is very efficient and detail-oriented. In our home we have a metal, 2-drawer filing cabinet, one whole drawer of which holds manila folders containing medical and other personal records for everyone in the family, titles and maintenance records for our vehicles, product instruction manuals and warranties and other valuable documents that have saved our butts many times. It’s amazing how much she has managed to fit into that drawer for the benefit of four lives.

According to this article by Deroy Murdock in National Review, however, my wife is more wasteful than the federal government, which somehow keeps the entire Social Security Trust Fund for generations of Americans stored in the locked bottom drawer of a gray filing cabinet in…Fort Knox? No, Parkersburg, West Virginia.

That drawer, inside an office of the U.S. Bureau of Public Debt, contains $1.76 trillion worth of special-issue U.S. Treasury bonds. Each of these, 225 pieces of paper in all, is contained in one of two white, loose-leaf notebooks that hold plastic page covers. Despite the protective plastic, these certificates have no more financial value than the ink with which they are printed.

Well, at least the drawer is locked. And the plastic page covers are a nice touch. I’d feel better, however, if there were also a sign outside the office that reads “Beware of the Leopard!”

“The paper is symbolic,” Bureau of Public Debt spokesman Pete Hollenbach explained in a February 26 Associated Press dispatch. As a 2004 Congressional Budget Office report observed, the trust fund is an “accounting mechanism” with “no economic resources.”

Well, our money is purely symbolic, too, right? Certainly there must be some assets out there accumulating on our behalf…right?

The key reason these notes have no value is that the money that should be behind them — the excess payroll taxes not devoted to today’s retirees — instead gets spent by Congress on everything from farm subsidies to national parks to armored Humvees.

In fiscal year 2004, Cato Institute scholar Michael Tanner reports, the Treasury collected $570.7 billion in payroll taxes and credited Social Security with $89 billion in interest. Social Security recipients received $501.6 billion in benefits. This $158.1 billion balance — which could have funded personal-retirement accounts — instead flowed into general revenues. Congress spent that amount no differently than income-tax proceeds. In corporate America, this misallocation of funds is punishable by law. In Washington, it’s the law.

I think this is a great approach and obviously a real space-saver. I think we as citizens should do the same. Instead of paying Social Security taxes with real money, we simply give the government I.O.U.s and tell them to call us when it needs the money. Oh, wait…I think that’s what we’ve already done.

(HT: Amy Ridenour).

On the Border

Over the last several weeks you may or may not have been following the Minuteman Projects story about citizen volunteers preparing to patrol the Arizona-Mexico border. If you’ve been following the story only through the mainstream media (somehow this phrase always makes me think of the natural effects of a college kegger) then you might picture this group as Bubbas in a pick-up trucks hauling long ropes.

If so then you need to read this first person account of the first weekend’s action by a flying “Bubba” that was posted by LaShawn Barber today.

Filings: Love, and the Difference Between Being a Friend and Being Friendly

Sandy from the MAWB Squad was asked to opine yesterday on the lessons that could be learned from the highly publicized celebrity marital crack-ups that are keeping the tabloids in business. Of course she delivered admirably in “Advice to the Lovelorn.”

This got me to thinking, however, about the far less titillating but every bit as devastating romantic tragedies that happen all around us. Even, dare I say, in our own lives. My wife and I have been very blessed and happy in our 17-year marriage, but we both experienced emotion-searing, even mind-altering damage in our single days (stories for another day, but don’t count on it).

As we look to what may be ahead for our daughters, we’ve come to realize that the dating culture of serial monogamy and mini-divorces is not a good way to find a mate for life. And that’s based on our experiences from 20 and 30 years ago in the more idealistic days of the sexual revolution. With our oldest being of “dating” age, my wife and I naturally want better for our daughters than what we subjected ourselves to when we were their age.

Back then, at least, the culture expected couples to adopt the appearance of having a relationship. Now even the minimal commitment to someone else needed to simply make a date is optional in today’s hook-up culture among teens and older singles as reported here and in the New York Times, and even among ninth-graders. Somewhere along the line “Wham, bam, thank you, ma’am” went from being the height of selfishness to the point where merely throwing in the “thank you” passes for gentlemanliness. The glorification of sensation has ironically desensitized a significant part of a generation, and I can’t even picture how much “enlightenment” is required to make this look like a good thing.

Even in evangelical circles the challenges are severe for parents with an eye to preparing their youth for healthy, happy marriages. The book “Best Friends for Life” by Michael and Judy Phillips includes several case studies of kids who grew up in “churched” families and dated other “churched” youth and eventually married – and then crashed and burned. Though each example had different characteristics, the common thing I saw in each was the parents really had no vision of what they wanted for their kids or what was acceptable – or if they did, they didn’t communicate it. In many cases they gave in to the predominant dating model and were simply glad that their son or daughter was dating another Christian. As a result, the youngsters also fell into self-centered relationships in which they may have been physical, but they were far from intimate.

Is there another option? Well, I admit that the locking them in a tower until they’re 30 plan has its strong points, but that doesn’t do anything to prepare them for a strong marriage either. Our plan is the opposite of isolation, both the isolation of the tower where they are separated from others and the passion-induced isolation of being a couple where they separate themselves from others. We’ve encouraged our daughters to have a group of friends they can count on and do things as a group. Boys can be a part of this group, and are even encouraged, but no pairing up. The idea is to determine who can be trusted to be a friend – and not who just wants to get friendly.

What are the standards for friendship? The Bible lists some good ones (New Living Translation):

— Friends are few (Prov. 18:24) – “There are ‘friends’ who destroy each other, but a real friend sticks closer than a brother.” We know the traditional concept of what a brother is, but think about what a brother is to a woman. A brother is someone who will stand by you and stand up for you because he wants the best for you, not because of what you can do for him.

— A friend lays down his life (John 15:13)”And here is how to measure it–the greatest love is shown when people lay down their lives for their friends.” A friend puts your needs and well-being above his own.

— A friend loves unconditionally (Prov. 17:17) “A friend is always loyal, and a brother is born to help in time of need.”

— A friend speaks the truth in love (Prov. 27:6)
“Wounds from a friend are better than many kisses from an enemy.” A friend will tell you what you need to hear, again because he wants what is best for you. Someone caught up in infatuation or what he thinks is love will keep quiet so as not to jeopardize the physical aspects of the relationship.

— A friend encourages you and is sensitive to your needs (Prov. 26:18, 19) “Just as damaging as a mad man shooting a lethal weapon is someone who lies to a friend and then says, ‘I was only joking.'”

If true friendships can be established in a safe environment where the emotional stakes are not as high, then the ground is prepared for a possible courtship with an eye toward marriage. In a true courtship, both partners learn to trust the other with more and more of their innermost thoughts, wishes and emotions. This relationship is the key to a successful marriage. Most modern marriages fall short of genuine intimacy due to a distorted cultural image of romanticism that expects immediate intimacy. Too many want to jump right to the courtship stage simply because the other person is cute or a “hottie.” This might make for lovely wedding photos (or great tabloid covers) but is not much of a foundation for a lovely marriage.

I may appear pretty smug and overconfident seeing as how our oldest is just entering this dynamic time, but the rules and expectations have been set down and discussed for several years prior to this, and we do have wonderful examples in the lives of other parents and young marrieds we know who have crossed these waters ahead of us.

Truthfully, I don’t expect it to be easy, but right now the relationship my wife and I have with our children is still the most important in their lives aside from the relationship they are developing with God. And part of our responsibility in this relationship is to prepare them for a relationship with God and for a loving and godly relationship with their spouse – and ultimately their own children who they, in turn, must train. It won’t be the easiest course, but given what else is out there, I know it is the safest.

Very Good, Varifrank

Bogus Gold recommended this post today about whether one man (or woman for that matter) can make a difference. I read the essay and was so taken with it that I went on to read many more offerings by the same blogger. As a result, Varifrank has been added to the Night Lights blogroll. A meager honor, to be sure, but all I can bestow. Aside from this, perhaps:



Varifrank offers exquisite writing of such skill and scope that it would have discouraged me from ever typing again – if it hadn’t also inspired me to elevate my own game. In simpler words, this is really good stuff. Go read it.