I'm feeling like I should post something, because it's been so long. And frankly, I'm a little overwhelmed. And kind of sad.
The news of the pharmacists who want a say in the doctor patient relationship is upsetting me. What's next? They won't prescribe medication to people with STDs because they don't agree with their lifestyle? Or HIV medication? A friend of mine's mother said that what this country is missing right now is healthy shame. I can see the point I suppose, but who decides what that is? Being one of the gays, I can't help but feel those fingers pointing at me. And it feels increasingly like a war is being waged. Has it always been this bad, or have these people figured out if they play victim that there is a chance they can win by saying their rights aren't being respected? I do think we've gone over the top with the victim culture, and that has to stop. But what to make of all this? Sad, just sad. Where will it end? I heard on NPR that pharmacists or nurses could refuse chicken pox and rubella vaccines because they were originally developed using stem cells. So it's better to have a healthy child die or risk it's life than use something developed with discarded cells that were never viable? I fret for our future.
I was thinking about this in light of the dicey ethics on display in Kingdom of Heaven. We are given kind of a wuss of a hero (Bialin played by Orlando Bloom), and I have to say that I am unsure how he survived the final battle considering he had just learned to fight in the beginnning of the movie, but...
He falls in love with another man's wife, and has sex with her, but when the option of killing the man to save the kingdom is suggested, he says that it would be wrong, and he refuses. Because of that, the villian becomes king, attacks the Muslims, thousands die horrible deaths, and Jerusalem is lost. And this is ethical because...? You can fuck his wife, but spare his life so thousands die, even though you know he will destroy the kingdom. So you can be noble. This is our hero? I'm not sure the choice I would have made, but in the politics of the time and what was presented, it doesn't look insanely heroic. Sounds callous, but that's how it came across to me. Though I can't believe I would be arguing for murder to retain the status quo. I think it's the adultery thing--and what they all seemed to stand to lose. Which was everything.
I'm sure the pharmacists loved it.
Well, I'm unsure if it's good I'm posting this or not, but hopefully on to a less rant-y topic next time.
The news--it's just getting me down.