Sanctity of Life

October 5, 2019 Sociocultural Issues No Comments

At first place, I mean human life. This can eventually be broadened to any life, any ‘sentient being.’

Sanctity

To me, life is its own sanctification. It doesn’t need a sanctifying instance, even if there were one.

If you want sanctification to come from ‘anything’, then – to me again – that ‘anything’ sanctifies life through life itself. This means that from here on, you too, dear reader who agrees with the basics, can at least understand my concerns apropos the rest of this text.

Implications

‘Sanctity of life’ has many implications regarding culturally debated issues. Humans live with life and death all the time. Moreover, its borders are especially meaningful to us.

I expect they are to you.

The beginning

Generally seen, life is a continuum, flowing over generations. It doesn’t start at the point where two gender cells meet. The fact that a new individual can emerge from the meeting is only possible within ‘life’ already present, at least within nature as we – still – know it today.

This doesn’t diminish the importance of the meeting. It is indeed a special occasion. Without one very specific one, I wouldn’t be writing this text. In fact, even without many specific ones in the past going back to times immemorial. So, here again, we come to life as an eternal flow.

An ‘eternal flame.’

The sanctity of the flame just ‘is’. It doesn’t need anything else.

As a physician, I have known women who suffered severely from an abortion that happened some thirty years before. From early on, life has sanctification that should be reckoned with. An abortion isn’t just ‘something.’ There is a lot of deep meaning attached.

The end

Life should be valued/sanctified at every drop of it. Huge implications.

There should not be a basic right to carry a weapon of mass destruction in a suitcase. Nor any weapon at all together with the intention to kill as many people as possible. If you give the carrying right to 100 million people, of course, one of them is bound to be a lunatic with such intention. This means you’re playing with statistics.

It’s a balance between freedom and the sanctity of life.

One can kill with a gun, with a car, with a knife… The balance is always relevant.

It’s not just a question of freedom.

At the other side of this balance:

ending a life should not be a matter of ‘guilt.’ Its sanctification goes way beyond.

It should certainly not be a matter of ego-revenge. Here it’s easy. The importance of any ego-thing obliterates in relation to life.

Health

Healing, whole, holiness.

Taking care of one’s health is also related to the sanctity of life. At any moment, one can take this towards concrete action.

This way, disregarding health – for instance – is incompatible with reinstating the death penalty.

It’s one balance. Eventually, your balance.

You are life.

The sanctity of life is the sanctity of you.

Please follow and like us:
LinkedIn
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
RSS
Follow by Email
SHARE

Related Posts

Poetry is Not the Absence of Rationality

Nevertheless, to many people, it seems to be so. I find this dangerous. It sets both against each other and precludes a nice being-human in full potential. [see also: “Rationality and Poetry”] Mistrusting ‘the expert’ Experts frequently bend on their rational stance to lend them authority to speak and even decide what others should do. Read the full article…

From deep meaning to post-capitalism

We seem to be stuck in capitalism, yet capitalism itself seems to be stuck. Can ‘deep meaning’ help us to get beyond? Monetary values are measurable. For pure-capitalism (!) to work perfectly, everything needs to get a value that is measurable, comparable, thereby making the valued thing tradable. The most abstract trade is of course Read the full article…

Sustainable Growth = Inner Growth

Growth primarily happens inside people. This way, nature underlies the economy. What has been interpreted as ‘Darwinian.’ Darwin himself saw as ‘fittest’ in the transgenerational survival process the ones whose genes had most chance to be passed on. These individuals are not necessarily the strongest, the most aggressive or unscrupulous. They could be the most Read the full article…