Our Death Panel Democracy
Some of us are so convinced of our own incomparable virtue and moral supremacy, we're even willing to let other people die to prove it.
What’s the deal with progressive authority and its apparent, practically messianic dedication to systemically facilitating as much human death as possible?
The curiously suspicious irony is that progressive authority—wherever it’s in power in the world and at whatever socio-political level—on the one hand aggressively and persistently insists the ideology it represents (under whatever disguising buzzwords it may happen to be presented to us in any given circumstances), endows it, and only it, with the incomparable virtue and morality suitable enough to boldly lead the rest of the humanity it considers itself so far above, into the future.
Yet, on the other hand, wherever it presides over whatever level of jurisdiction in which it monopolizes power and authority, nothing but chaos, confusion, political, economic and social incapacitation, lawlessness, criminality, violence and injustice prevail.
And death.
Death not just as a manifestation.
Death as an ideology, a culture, a palpable, systemic environment, aggressively inimical to everything, anything and especially anybody, that affirms life.
Frequent fliers on Kentucky Fried Christian Airlines will know we’ve discussed the vagaries of progressive morality and the morally bankrupt, hollow farce of virtue signaling, with efforts like “Virtue Signaling and the New Morality” and “The Mask of Zorro.”
We’ve also taken a good look at the culture of death generated and manifested by progressive authority bent on imposing its new world social order on us all whether we want it or like it, or not, in “Death On Demand;” in which we saw how through a state-sponsored and promoted, medically-assisted suicide regime, Canada has become the global epicenter for people who want to—or can be convinced they want to—end their life for a variety of ever-increasingly, nebulously-substantiated reasons.
So eager progressive authority seems to be to escort as many of us in as many ways, in as many numbers and as quickly as it possibly can, to our final resting place, that it not only seems to be manipulating the infrastructures of the human environment to facilitate as much targeted, incidental and collateral death as possible; it not only seems to be making it as easy as it can be for fragile, vulnerable, and desperately distraught people in need of guidance and healing, to instead choose to just end it all and save everybody else the burden of having to put up with their cancers or mental and emotional difficulties...
But it’s also resorting in ever-increasing instances now to employing the state-monopoly on health care wherever it may hold it, to simply deny people facing medical difficulties whatever they may need to survive them.
So that they die and stop being a bother to our virtuous and morally superior progressive super-people, who have better things to do with our money than spend it on any of us for selfish frivolities like staying alive.
The following, then, should be no surprise, in the country where asking the government to kill you has become as easy as applying for a rewards-points shopping card...
“No, Mr. Bond… I expect you to die!”
In the news this last week was a story about 36-year-old Canadian woman Amanda Huska.
According to an article at CTVNews.ca, Huska’s been in an Ontario hospital ICU on life-support for nearly three months now, suffering from severe liver failure.
Prior to that, she was referred to the Toronto-based University Health Network (UHN), Canada’s largest liver transplant facility; but the Alcohol Liver Disease team at UHN rejected her eligibility for a transplant, saying it’s because Huska sadly pickled her liver with a long history for such a short life, of excessive alcohol consumption.
Having unsuccessfully tried to quit drinking on a number of occasions prior to her admission to intensive care, according to her partner Nathan Allen, the hopefully optimistic Huska registered for an addiction program to help her stay sober after being discharged following a transplant.
Nevertheless—and to add insult to heartlessly callous injury—the UHN disqualification also means Huska’s ineligible to receive a transplant from a living donor who matches her blood type.
Allen matches her blood type and is ready to donate his liver right now. In the absence of “being allowed” to do that, the CTVNews articles tells us:
“…he has found a hospital in Europe willing to perform a living liver transplant if Amanda defies the odds and survives long enough. He’s hoping to crowdfund the costs, which could rise above $300,000.”
“I will do whatever I can to save her life, just like the medical profession should be doing here.”
So because of the “morally superior virtue” governing the ethics of the UHN, representatives of the ancient profession ostensibly sworn to save lives and do no harm, have arbitrarily made it virtually impossible for Huska to receive the life-saving medical care she needs, placing her life in imminent final jeopardy; while Allen says she’s been given a month to survive on the most liberal of estimates.
All so a morally bankrupt facade of fake virtue and feigned righteousness can be maintained by proud, self-defined paragons in authority.
And in this case, who also exercise the power of physical life and death over others—who have since the horrors of the Covid operation, demonstrated to the world by their misanthropically shameless attitude, that no price (not even the death of millions of people facilitated by their will and policies), is too steep to pay for the “blessing” of them leading us into their “new world.”
The “morally superior virtue” being signaled in this case by this callously arbitrary decision to deny a young woman on the verge of death, the by now simple procedure that can save her life?
“You didn’t live a perfectly flawless life, and now that the consequences have caught up to you, you deserve to die. We’re morally superior and virtuous.”
Playing the devil’s advocate for a moment to be fair and to judge righteously and not by mere appearances like the Lord Jesus, Yeshua the Messiah commands in John 7:24, on the UHN side of the argument, the sole empirical justification for their decision, is that a liver transplant is an exceedingly expensive procedure; and with Huska’s history of excessive alcohol consumption, UHN has no guarantee their “investment” won’t just be money thrown off the end of the pier if she returns to drinking again after receiving her new liver.
In the first place, what kind of humanity is “Progress” trying to signal to us that has “morally superior virtue,” that denies human life because of the price tag involved?
In the second place, horse-droppings!
Huska has already registered for an addiction program to help her abstain from drinking after getting a transplant.
Furthermore, the CTVNews article says “studies show transplants for alcohol-related liver failure are generally successful. There is an over 94% survival rate at one year... [Only] about 1 in 10 people do return to drinking.”
According to research by Edmonton liver transplant surgeon, Dr. Saumya Jayakumar, the period or dedication to sobriety before a transplant isn’t a factor in the ultimate outcome following the procedure. Patients who abstained from drinking for six months prior to receiving a transplanted liver do no better after the surgery than those who keep drinking.
So any excuse that people with pickled livers can’t receive a new one because their drinking automatically spells doom for a successful outcome to the procedure and therefore disqualifies them from it, is invalidated by scientifically determined empirical evidence.
And yet, the CTVNews article informs, UHN’s own statistics show 86% of people with alcohol-related liver problems who apply for a liver transplant, are rejected. Only 14% get accepted, and ultimately, only 6% actually receive a transplant.
So it all comes down to this: under the guise of feigned financial responsibility and excused further by the fake moral superiority of virtue signaling, those with the abundant means to render life-saving care to those who desperately need it, are with a cruel sociopathy approaching the systemically homicidal, refusing to do so, in favor of simply letting suffering people die.
Debra Selkirk is an advocate for compassion for alcohol-related liver failure. Her husband was refused a transplant because of his drinking. He died of liver failure in 2010.
In the CTVNews article, she accurately and starkly sums up the sad and infuriating essence of the issue:
“...a life-saving procedure is being based on perceived poor behaviour... People aren’t turned away because they didn’t exercise or because they work too much or they don’t get enough sleep or they didn’t follow doctor’s orders. So, in Nathan and Amanda’s case, you’re seeing someone being told, ‘You didn’t follow doctor’s orders, so we’re not going to help you. We’re going to let you die.’”
This is the kind of “healing” being practiced right now under the systemic expression of the authority progressive elitists insist is “morally superior and virtuous.”
Can this really be the best we can get?
Let’s compare and contrast this “paragon of morality and virtue” in the healing profession of the modern, progressive nightmare-coming-true, to the healing regimen practiced by the founder and perfecter of the one, true faith in the one, true God the world knows as the Lord Jesus, Yeshua the Messiah, and see how it stacks up against the kind of compassion and care we see being exhibited by Our Democracy these days.
The same frequent fliers who may remember our previous discussions of fake morality, virtue signaling and the death culture of modern progressives, will also recall we discussed at great length the spiritual mechanics of the relationship between faith in God the Father through the Lord Jesus, and healing, in two pieces: “Your Faith Has healed You,” and “Go In Peace and Be Freed from Your Suffering.”
The main point with which we’re concerned here in comparing and contrasting the institutional medical regime of modern progressivism versus the healing regimen represented by the love, compassion and mercy of God as expressed by his only begotten Son during his ministry in the world, is to highlight the core difference between the two in the attitude with which each approaches the call to heal others as a service.
We’ve already seen what the modern progressive attitude is, as evidenced by upwardly trending medically-assisted suicide and cases like Amanda Huska’s.
So what was the Lord Yeshua’s attitude towards the healing of the afflicted?
The Lord Yeshua’s prime directive in his attitude towards everybody regardless of circumstance, was compassion combined with selfless service.
On the second count firstly, he tells his disciples in Mark 10:44-45:
“...whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
He defines the attitude governing all of his ministry—and especially the healing he performed—by selfless service for the good of whoever needs it; and demands his followers appropriate the same attitude in the living out of their faith (Luke 9:23); which would include the approach to the healing of others, whether by the supernatural power of God’s Holy Spirit, or by worldly means.
Secondly, on the first count, we have myriad instances where the Lord Jesus healed—without hesitation, reservation or delay—the afflicted who came to him in their suffering with hope and trust, out of the overwhelming compassion he felt for them.
In Matthew 11:28, he tells the people:
“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.”
He doesn’t say, “But only if...” He simply says, “Come, all...”
He placed no preconditions to be met on the healing he delivered. He didn’t refuse to heal anybody who came to him believing that he could relieve their afflictions. He didn’t require anybody to prove they merited their healing.
He just healed them.
Because he loved them, had compassion for their suffering, and the full supernatural power of God’s Holy Spirit with which to relieve them of their afflictions.
Free of charge. No questions asked.
That compassion is copiously attested to throughout the Gospels. In Matthew 9:36, we read:
“When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.”
In Matthew 20:29-34, while he was on the way to Jericho with his disciples, two blind men begged the Lord to heal them. When the crowd yelled at them to shut up and get lost, we learn how the Lord stopped, asked them what they wanted, and when they told him they wanted to see, we read in verse :34:
“Jesus had compassion on them and touched their eyes. Immediately they received their sight and followed him.”
Similarly to the more famous account (John 11:1-43) of bringing his dead friend Lazarus back to life after feeling compassion for the weeping and mourning of Martha, Mary and all those gathered in Bethany with them, in Luke 7:11-17, in a town called Nain, the Lord Yeshua encounters a funeral procession carrying the body of a poor widow’s only son. The widow was weeping wildly. In verse :13, we learn:
“When the Lord saw her, his heart went out to her and he said, ‘Don’t cry.’”
Then he went and brought her dead son back to life.
It didn’t matter to him the young man was dead. He didn’t hem and haw about it being a waste of his effort.
He had compassion. He wanted to be of service. And he brought him back to life.
Furthermore, not only did the Lord never ask any questions or demand any justification from his “patients” to prove their worthiness for his healing, at times he even went as far as to forgive them of their sinful pasts as part of the healing he rendered them.
In Matthew 9:1-8, Mark 2:1-12 and Luke 5:17-26, we learn of the time Jesus was teaching in a packed house, and some men brought a paralyzed friend to him to be healed. When they couldn’t get in because of the crowd, they lowered their sick friend down through the roof. The Lord, impressed by the tenacity of their trust in him, healed the young man, and also absolved him of all his wrongs of the past. In Mark 2:5, he tells him: “‘Son, your sins are forgiven.’”
What’s more, far from healing only with “certain conditions applying,” the Lord Yeshua healed no matter what it cost him personally. Which ultimately, was his life, because of the hatred he engendered in the authorities and their allies who opposed him for things like presuming to forgive sins (which up to that time was believed to be a right reserved for God alone), or healing on the Sabbath.
In the same episode with the healing at the crowded house, we read how the Pharisees witnessing the event were thinking precisely that, this time in Luke 5:21:
“Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
In Luke 13:10-16, while teaching in a synagogue on the Sabbath, the Lord Yeshua healed a crippled woman. The synagogue leader’s response was to be less than impressed with the miracle, and more concerned, as we read in verse :14, that “[t]here are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.”
And as we know, among the charges laid against him by the authorities—on the basis of which his execution was justified and ordered—was forgiving sins and healing on the Sabbath.
The Lord Jesus was the template for the same attitude displayed by all his apostles, too; which is the example by which we can all go as far as the attitude we should have—as individuals and as a society and culture—towards the rendering of healing to the afflicted.
In Acts 3:1-10, Peter and John encounter a lame man at the gates of the temple in Jerusalem. When the man asks them for alms, Peter, having compassion on him and wanting to be of more meaningful service to him than just flipping a coin into his cap, instead answers him in verse :6:
“‘Silver or gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.’”
The man then got up and started walking, then running and jumping for joy, praising God.
In Acts 5:12-16, we learn of how popular the apostles had become with the people, to the point that in verse :16, we read:
“Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed.”
And in Acts 19:11-12, we read how Paul was no slouch with the healing power of God’s Holy Spirit, either:
“God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them.”
So we see how the example of the Lord Jesus, followed by his apostles, and worthy of emulation by all of us as an attitude towards the healing of the afflicted—especially by institutionalized means like those we have in the medical industries of today—are defined by two simple and selfless overriding characteristics:
Compassion and service.
And we see by the many examples provided by the Gospels and in The Acts of the Apostles, that healing by and according to faithfulness to the word and will of God on the example of the Lord Jesus and his apostles, is delivered to all afflicted, regardless of preconditions and without prerequisite or prejudice.
God’s word tells us, like in Proverbs 3:27:
“Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to act.”
The apostle Peter writes in 1 Peter 4:10:
“Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others...”
The half-brother of the Lord Yeshua, Ya’akov, teaches us in James 4:17:
“If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.”
Callously denying people crucial medical care that’s readily available and deliverable, in order to signal some twisted sense of virtue by letting somebody simply die to show how morally superior we are, doesn’t sound much like either compassion or service, does it?
And God’s word also has something to say about that, too.
Proverbs 21:13:
“Whoever shuts their ears to the cry of the poor will also cry out and not be answered.”
“..because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful.” (James 2:13)
It’s your immortal soul, and your call, Progress.
(Photo Credits: iStockPhoto; CTVNews.ca; JesusFilmProject)
Kentucky Fried Christian encourages and welcomes your feedback and input. Something you like? Something you don’t like? Something of which you’d like to read more? Or less? Some topics you’d like to see discussed? Submit a comment or participate in the subscriber chat. You can follow Gene Kaye and Kentucky Fried Christian on TwitterX, Gettr and Truth Social. Check out the Videograms of Verse video series on the KFCh channel on Rumble. Listen to the podcast now right here on this Substack, or on Spotify or Podbean. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to help support Gene Kaye’s work; and now, get free access to the serialization of Living With Caligula, an anthology of short-fiction tales of the earliest Christian believers, available only on this Substack.