Monday, July 3, 2017

Who's Not Speaking For Baby #CharlieGard ?

Earlier today we heard that a Vatican-owned hospital (Bambino Gesu) offered to care for Baby Charlie Gard and that President Trump also offered assistance to him.  We pray that the hard hearts in England's National Health Service will turn from their murderous intents and at least let this baby go from their clutches.

From whom have we not heard yet?  Quite a few.
  • This so-called "Convocation of Catholic Leaders" in Orlando has not uttered one peep although they are ostensibly interested in the "challenges" facing the Church today.  If a hardened murderer was soon to be executed, you could bet your bottom dollar that the wailing and gnashing of teeth from that hotel could be heard the world over.  But when an innocent infant is being murdered by socialized medicine (one of their darling causes), they utter not one peep.
  • Speaking of "executions", death-penalty opponent Sr. Helen Prejean is another progressive who has been abysmally silent regarding a truly unjust execution.  I've searched both her Facebook and Twitter pages and cannot find not even the mention of #CharlieGard 's name.
  • Similarly the "Catholic Mobilizing Network To End the Use of the Death Penalty" (isn't that a mouthful?) also has nothing to say about this tiny, innocent victim of execution imposed by socialists.
We will continue to pray that #CharlieGard 's life will be spared.  In the meantime, the entities listed in the bulleted points have forfeited all moral credibility.  Truth be told, they accomplished that quite some time ago, but now such lack of credibility is one again made manifest.


  1. Kudos to Trump and Frank for earning brownie points with their constituencies.

    As a pediatric home care nurse, here is my take:

    I don't consider turning off the vent in cases of medical hopelessness --euthanasia. Baby Charlie has a hopeless condition---mitochondrial depletion syndrome. If baby Charlie were a patient in an American hospital, he would likely either be given a tracheostomy and sent home with a ventilator (and gtube) per his parents' desire or his parents would make the decision to turn off the vent in the hospital and let him go. I have worked with families who have made both of those decisions.

    If baby Charlie was born in a 3rd world hospital where there weren't the resources or money for such treatments, such decisions would not be necessary. Baby Charlie would pass peacefully shortly after birth, maybe even beautifully in his mothers arms.

    Seattle Kim, R.N.

  2. Seattle Kim - you miss the point - this is not a decision the state should be making, it is up to the parents to decide what's best for Charlie.

    1. I understand that. If this couple can receive funding for the baby to fly to America for experimental treatment--great. But you can't expect a governmental medical system to pay to keep everyone alive indefinitely.

    2. They have over $1M in funds to fly the baby over is not the issue - an out of control government is.

  3. John Carr has been pushing this crap for decades. "Unity" between pro-lifers and the "social justice" left.

    Cardinal diNardo picked it up.

    The dirty, dirty secret is that the "division" between pro-lifers and the Catholic Left is because the Catholic Left is pro-abortion.

    And that includes 90-95% of Catholic bureaucrats at the national and diocesan level.

    The pro-life movement realized 45 years ago that the bishops are irrelevant--except when they are hostile--Bernardin, Cupich, O'Malley, Dolan, Mahony, Gomez...

  4. The race to the bottom. Our Church leaders keep digging the hole deeper. President Trump, you may be interested to know, has a history of using his own jets for flying critically ill children at his own expense in order for them to receive life-saving treatment. He did this long ago, long before he thought of a run for the presidency. The man has HEART, and he clearly loves children. Can he please get credit for that, and not be unfairly criticized even when he does something we wish our own pope would offer to do??
    This issue is not about euthanasia, it is as was said correctly here, about a parents right to have the final say over their child. Clearly, the state believes they have the final say. They should have whatever power the people give them, do the people intend for them to have this incredible power? If not, the people need to get busy and remind the state who they WORK FOR. People do not serve the state, the state serves the people! Why has this been forgotten? That child belongs to God and to his parents. They raised more than enough money to bring him to the US, and this they should be able to do, since they have the money, regardless of likely outcome. The state has a vested interest in the death of this child, because if he comes here and does not die, what might that mean for future death decisions the state makes? People may balk, they may question the state, and this they do not want. I predict they will not release this poor child, so that their power remains unquestioned.
    I ask God to intervene and help this child and his parents.


Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.