During the Conference of Bishops of France, Mgr d'Ornellas delivers his “dream” for bioethics.
HXNUMXst, was held at the College of Bernardins, the Conference of Bishops of France. The bishops gave their positions with regard to the revision of bioethics laws currently being worked on by the government. Considering themselves not "heard", they wished to underline the "seriousness of the stakes". Among them, Bishop Ornellas gave a speech that was not unlike that of Martin Luther King.
On August 28, 1963, Pastor Martin Luther King gave a historic speech on a crucial social issue, segregation and racial discrimination. In the center, the drama of slavery. Yesterday, Bishop D'Ornellas also challenged his listeners on the question of the commodification of the body and told them about his " dream " for the Bioethics.
“Someone who inspires me a lot, precisely because in a certain way of the support he asked me to do with fragile people with disabilities, in l'Arche founded by Jean Vanier.
Martin Luther King, prophet of the brotherhood, of whom we know this sublime sentence, 'I have a dream'.
Yes, I also have a dream. It is nourished by faith in God who speaks and reveals the admirable beauty of man. He entrusted the world to him to care for and cultivate. He entrusted his fellow man to him, so that he might receive him as a brother, and make him his close, attentive and vigilant guardian. He gives us his word, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself', to which the Jewish and Christian Bible testifies.
My dream, inhabited by this call to love is also encouraged by the call of wisdom which crosses the Jewish and Christian Scriptures and which challenges Reason, by opening up unsuspected perspectives, but also by unifying its specialized knowledge, which each in its register remains limited because of its sphere of competence.
This dream is also nourished by a figure, which is as has been said, although biblical is universal. Who doesn't know the Good Samaritan? Faced with the one who suffers, who is even left half-dead. He does all he can, but it is not enough. He leads him to the inn, so that the inn can take care of him. This love of the Samaritan becomes the love of the inn. This singular love of a person becomes the love of an entire society. How can we reflect together on bioethics without thinking that it is necessary in our personal relationships and our personal contacts to lead to society so that it can effectively take charge of the one who was half-dead and who thanks to society fully regains life.
I dream that bioethics is a word in harmony with gratitude, because it would generate more and more therapeutic innovations, benefiting more and more patients.
I dream that bioethics is no longer synonymous with concern, because it would be fascinated by the power of techniques and no longer place respect for human dignity in all on its frontispiece.
I dream of a bioethics illuminated by a thoughtful and mature look at the person in the unity of his being, where the bodily and the spiritual, where the biological and the will, are indivisible, inseparable, inseparable to quote the Council of State. As for the Church, she says quite simply, speaking of the human being, that he is a unified totality. Thanks to such a vision of the human being, bioethics would no longer be burdened by a contradiction which risks disqualifying it. When on the one hand, as we have said, we grant an exclusive preponderance to the will, to the detriment of the biological link, and on the other hand we satisfy the desire to manifest the biological link.
I dream of a bioethics influenced by an in-depth look at man and not just by solving partial problems that, moreover, it has gradually created and which are posed one beside the other.
I dream of a bioethics, where the best interests of the children are indeed considered in a primordial way. These children, they are all born equal in dignity, according to our Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as was the case for us adults, when we came into this world, when we were born. But who will accurately say the broad content of this best interests of the child? It cannot be reduced to the legal certainty of one's state and the possibility of growing up in a stable family environment, as the Council of State has just defined. Who will finally understand why the international community felt that this consideration of the best interests of the child should be paramount?
I dream of a bioethics that is adult. Like any adult society, worthy of the name, it will then assume with pride and joy its full responsibility for the generation which comes into the world and which it even arouses. For adults, this responsibility is paramount.
I dream of a bioethics inhabited by respect for the dignity of human procreation. That is to say, a bioethics animated by a great sense of responsibility, which ultimately is the real name of freedom. This responsibility lives entirely in our human, spiritual and bodily capacity to conceive a new human being who is a person. It is he this newborn with his human rights who gives the measure to our desires to give birth to him and not the technological power. Faced with the emergence of the person in history, how can we accept that the technique appoints its conception to a fabrication or to a commodification? Indeed, is not each newborn a unique person, rich in unprecedented promises and equal in dignity with adults. This is why the bill as it is made must not obscure options but on the contrary make them more effective. Because it is beautiful and socially useful to give a father and a mother to a child, who by the accidents of life is deprived of it.
I dream of a bioethics elaborated in the light of fraternity, which gives its true meaning to freedom and equality. Are these two values not atrophied without fraternity? Fraternity has an objective content which is outlined as we have just heard in the book on bioethics. This fraternity is the one that generates fair public health and research policies because it gives priority to the most vulnerable, respected as full-fledged people.
I dream of an enlightened bioethics which uses techniques in a responsible way. Their use would never contradict our fraternity. He would oppose the increase of some human beings to the detriment of other humans. These techniques would no longer be the Trojan horse, procuring its technical victories over our limits inherent in the human condition by going beyond them. To allow techniques to free Man from all his essential limits is to submit him to technological power, it is to prevent him from understanding himself in depth and it is to prevent him, as has been beautifully written, from to be himself in complete freedom.
I dream of a bioethics where science is more and more irrigated by wonder and by humility in front of the astonishing beauty of the living. Scientists would then be guided by the wisdom which gives the audacity to seek while being assured of finding how to better take care of their brothers and sisters in humanity. For the dignity of the patient is the same as that of the researcher. the dignity of the child is strictly the same as the dignity of the adult, marvelously engaged in the scientific research which is so necessary. This enlightened bioethics would then open the search for the right path, without this being implemented following a blind debate because it is dependent on competition or on the markets to be conquered.
I dream of a bioethics that does not support the gigantic procreation markets.
I dream of a bioethics where the disinterested search for the truth would animate all its actors. It would then be possible to discuss calmly and without taboos about the human embryo, from its conception to its birth, passing through the various stages of its development, including the enigmatic cell differentiation. Not to use it for research, this embryo, but to treat it better and to admire it better.
I therefore dream of a bioethics that accepts reasonable and rational evidence, which science continues to confirm about this embryo. What is essentially human from the start or never will be.
I dream of a bioethics whose reflections would result from a peaceful debate, which recognizes the power of reason and not of lobbying to build a just law. Because reason, true to itself, seeks the common good thanks to which all can flourish in the respect of oneself and others, in particular the smallest. Bioethics remains first and foremost an ethics, granted to an integral vision of the human being and not a simple point of balance, always unsatisfactory, between contradictory interests.
I dream of a bioethics where we would listen with benevolence to the thoughts of citizens, without immediately disqualifying it by those in the know. If the citizens, in particular the most fragile, express a fear which is moreover relayed by the study of the Council of State, this one, this fear, is a word to be heard and not to be despised or to be humiliated. In the light of brotherhood, bioethics does not separate, knowing that they are very helpful and patient. This would go in the direction of progress. As it was a step forward when the law of 2002 established that for decisions concerning their health, it is the patients who make them, along with the health professionals. This is how I dream of a bioethics where this would bring together citizens whoever they are, which would attest to the republican motto, which emphasizes its third word, fraternity. It would accentuate the Gospel phrase that would say to everyone in the know and to the rest, you are all brothers.
I dream of a bioethics which keeps medicine its essential role within society, while keeping doctors the exercise of their personal and collegial responsibility. Admittedly, thanks to the framework provided by the law, but without this law controlling their medical acts and transforming them in part into simple service providers.
I dream that bioethics will not cease to strengthen the confidence of our fellow citizens in healthcare personnel, whatever they may be.
I dream of a bioethics which respects differences without these being inequalities and which does not discriminate between people regardless of their sexual orientation, with constant reference to the major principles of dignity and fraternity.
I dream that bioethics know how to build an inn where hospitality is written on the pediment of its front door, so that anyone, whatever their sexual orientation, would be welcome.
Finally, I dream of a bioethics where the principles of non-contradiction and justice guide the hands, which trembling, write the law. "
Check out some more reasons to say no to fatherless assisted reproduction below:
Image Credit: Creative Commons Peter Potrowl - catwalker / Shutterstock.com
Info Chrétienne being an online press service recognized by the Ministry of Culture, your donation is tax deductible up to 66%.