The Sanctity of Life and Medical Assistance In Dying- Considering Canada’s MAID Policy

Christians need to stop listening to the world and start listening to God, so that thinking Christian becomes as natural as breathing. Welcome to the Thinking Christian podcast. This is Dr. James Spencer. Through calm, thoughtful, theological conversations, Thinking Christian offers a mix of interviews and discussions that highlight the ways God is working in the lives of his people and question the underlying social, cultural, and political assumptions that keep the church from conforming more closely to the image of Christ. Now, on to today's episode of Thinking Christian. Hey, everyone, this is Dr. James Spencer, and you're listening to Thinking Christian. On today's episode, we have a guest host, Maggie Hubbard. Maggie works with me at Useful to God and was my co-host on our previous podcast, Faithful and Flawed. In this episode, Maggie and I talk about the Canadian assisted suicide legislation. We taped this following a new ruling by the Canadian courts in 2023. Given that it's Sanctity of Life Month, it seemed appropriate to re-air this episode. As we think about the sanctity of life, we have to recognize that while abortion is a major issue, other concerns will likely be on their way. America's had its fair share of assisted suicide cases, but it would be foolish to think that the matter is actually closed. Canada's position is problematic and should prompt Christians to think deeply about the sanctity of human life, even at the end of life. And I hope you enjoy this conversation in this episode of Thinking Christian. Hello, listeners. This is Maggie Hubbard along with Dr. James Spencer. And I just wanted to start this out with a trigger warning that we're going to be talking about some sensitive topics such as suicide and death and just what the Bible says and how we should approach it from a biblical standpoint. Recently on the news, Canada is allowing assisted suicide. It seems to be really making headlines and I know that it's not sat well with me. So I wanted to get Dr. James Spencer's take on that and kind of how we should feel about that. Welcome to Faithful and Flawed, a podcast to encourage Christians that they are not alone in their struggles. Each week, we will have discussions with expert guests and we'll engage in conversations that will encourage and challenge God's people. There is nothing that says Christians can't be faithful and flawed. In fact, God looks to use flawed individuals, just like you and me, to further his kingdom work. Join us now as we work to uncomplicate the gospel. I think, number one, it's important to realize that while, you know, this has made news more recently, this isn't a new development. Canada's been doing this since around 2018. The new development is actually related to two issues, as far as I can tell. Number one, they are going to begin allowing medical assisted death, medical assisted dying for people for whom imminent death is not clear. So in other words, there are some people who their medical prognosis might allow doctors to foresee that they'll die in, let's say, a few weeks or a month or something like that. Under the previous legislation, that was the basic idea, was that when people, when the doctors are fairly sure that somebody's going to die anyway, that medical assisted dying would be fine. And so that was part of their previous statute. There was a court case through Sean. You'll see it referenced in the literature if you wanted to look it up. But it challenged that part of the statute and basically said that it's difficult for, you know, people with the same disease state, but with slightly different prognosis, it could be then treated differently under the law as written. So they made an amendment and changed that to people without a foreseeable date of death or a foreseeable imminent death. That was one change. The second change is related to the criteria used to determine whether somebody is eligible for medical assisted dying. That was previously precluded mental illness as a sole underlying cause or as a sole underlying reason for medically assisted death. They passed this bill two years ago, March, I believe, 2021, with that exclusion in there. It's actually written in as an exclusion and excluded mental health concerns with the intention of studying whether or not it should be included later. And they sort of put it on a two year hiatus so that in March of 2023, it will go into effect that if you just have mental illness, you will then be able to apply for medically assisted death if you meet all the rest of the criteria. And the criteria are fairly robust. And so from a, you know, sort of a non-ethical, non-Christian standpoint, right, I just wanted to give that narrative so people understand how this has developed. This is not something that came up overnight. You're hearing it as an overnight sort of thing. This has been around. It's been happening. And Canada has had numerous conversations and legal sort of, like I said, court cases and different things that have informed where they're at right now. Not that we can agree on the destination, but I just wanted to sort of dispel this idea that this came out of nowhere. OK, so I, you know, I feel like I've always heard of like assisted suicide, right, in humans. But I guess I've been living in a rock because I didn't think anywhere was actually humanely doing that. So they have been doing it. Let's say like you've got a cancer diagnosis. You're really sick. You're suffering with pain. Let's like there they want to go ahead and just end their suffering and go, I guess, peacefully. But now, like let's say someone is depressed or is bipolar, has some kind of mental health issue. They just decide, you know, I don't want to live anymore because I'm sad and I see no way out and I don't see how this is ever going to get better. They can apply to have medically assisted suicide. Are there special doctors that do this? I mean, or is it just primary care doctors that you can tell or? So basically the way it works is some of it would depend on the disease state. And so they do have in their legislation requirements that a specialist in a specific disease state. So let's say I'm a general practitioner and somebody comes in with a rare neurological problem that seems the prognosis. I know that the prognosis is going to be death, but I don't know enough about the disease state to really say when. So in those cases, my understanding of the way the law is written is that there are very narrow circumstances in which I could actually help that person die on my own. I have to go now get somebody who understands this disease state quite well to confirm my diagnosis to help me understand things. Now, they've eliminated the waiting period for people with a foreseeable death. This is part of the difficulty of the language and imminent foreseeable death. Who knows what imminent means? You know, right. Right. How do we define that? Right. So there's a lot of sort of conversation even now in Canada about that sort of language. But they've eliminated a 10 day waiting period. So if I say, hey, I'd like to engage in this, they used to say, OK, we're going to give you 10 days to rethink it. They've eliminated that for those who have a more imminent death. For those who don't have a more imminent death, they do have a 30 day waiting period, which can be interrupted by things like if there is a sense in which this person would lose their mental capacities within that 30 day window, then some of those things can be disrupted. But within that 30 day window, they're given the options that they would have for treatment, for ongoing things and that kind of stuff. Some of the objections to that window, which I think are really good objections. One Christian group that works in this area of euthanasia. They don't usually call it euthanasia in Canada. They call it medically assisted. Right. This Christian group is objected and said, listen, it shouldn't be just informed about the treatment. It should be engaging in those treatments. And so there's an active, an active role that the government would take in order to preserve life as opposed to a more passive role and suggesting that life could be preserved, but really doing nothing about it. And so all those kind of conversations are happening right now in Canada. And to some degree, you know, this in ways mirrors the debate that we have around abortion in the United States. It's full of all of that complexity. It's full of all of those emotions. It's full of all of those, you know, multiple sides of an issue. This new legislation is likely, I mean, the number of changes that made to this over the last four years have been kind of crazy. And so I would anticipate this being an ongoing conversation in Canada and maybe some reeling and going after a time. But for right now, this is what it looks like it's headed toward. You know, that's, I feel like this is a topic I've always struggled with. You know, I've had family members that have attempted suicide. I have never felt that I don't feel like I've ever felt that low to the point where I would want to take my life. But I sympathize with people like that because it does run in my family and we've had to overcome that. I've said things like, if I ever lost my kids, you know what I mean? Husband, I don't know how I could live. But I, you know, I think of Job in the Bible and his

Suffering and his friends were like, why don't you just curse God and die, you know. And so I always think about him when, you know, people are suffering and want to end that. And God had a purpose and a plan through all that pain and suffering. So, I mean, what's your, I feel like I probably know your stance, but I mean, what's like a biblical response or approach to situations like this? Sure. I think this is sort of all rooted in an over-realized sense of our own autonomy. That somehow we have become such sovereign individuals that we get to choose when we die. And that would not be a biblical view on what it means to be human. Human beings are subject to God. We are to serve and obey and be his viceroy, which is really what the language in Genesis when the original human couple was created and they're made in the image of God. That image of God is sort of a viceroyancy, that they are going to rule in the stead of God or on God's behalf would probably be the better way to say it. And so we are his subjects. We are his servants. We are to do what he asks us to do, regardless of how it makes us feel. And for us to think that we have sufficient autonomy to just decide when to take our own life is a clear, I think, you know, sort of implication or consequence of the fall. It has more dire consequences than any other action we might take because taking a life, there's no real way, whether it's yours or someone else's, there's no way to sort of fix that. So there's no recompense that can be made. But I do think that it's in the same line as the rest of our sinful behaviors. We like to choose what we want to do. We want to choose the path that we are going to follow. And this is just the radical end of that sort of logic and trajectory of our lives when we opt to follow our own desires. And so I would say that that underlying autonomy and individualism is part of what we're dealing with there and that it is certainly not something that Christians should be advocating for. Oftentimes we get caught up in the suffering of others, but, you know, suffering is really a part of life. The Bible does not absolve us from suffering. While I can sympathize with people who are going through those kind of things, I can't get to the point where I sympathize so much that I would say, it's now time to end your life. It's not my decision and it's not theirs either. Right. So I think that goes back to the whole, we live in a lost world. They don't know Christ, so they don't know hope. It's kind of like what we talked about in our last episode with Balenciaga. Our heart should break for people that have no hope or no promise, right? That God is going to deliver. You know, we should have a Christian response. So let me ask you a tough question. Let's say a Christian, right? Like they've devoted their life to Christ. I don't know. Let's say they're in a tough situation. They end their life. Do you think they go to heaven? Sorry, that's a deep, that is a deep question, right? Like, let's say they're saved and they bought and they've served them their whole life. That is the question that I just like struggle with, right? Because it's like they're saved. They accepted Jesus into their heart, right? And it's like, I don't know, that is so hard for me. I think it gets down to a couple of sort of root issues. Number one, how is it that we're saved and secured in Christ, right? We're saved and secured through faith in Christ, not through any actions that we take, even subsequent to that faith in Christ. Now, one could make the argument that if someone is actually saved, they would never think about taking their life. Right. Absolutely. For me personally, that gets into the mechanisms of what it is to commit suicide. We often sort of think about what it means to commit suicide and how people who commit suicide are actually thinking is probably the better way to put it. And I'm not sure we fully understand that. I'm not sure that it is such a premeditated sort of idea that someone really takes the time to plan it all out and do it, not in every case. I'm not as up on the medical evidence as I probably should be, but my understanding is that often suicide is almost like a spur of the moment thing. Yeah. That, you know, it sort of comes upon you and just sort of happens in that way. And so I would not say that anyone who commits suicide is, it was not saved. I wouldn't say that. I think that, you know, if suicide is going to be, you know, the litmus test for how we determine who goes and who doesn't, I would just really question that. Let me ask you a serious question. If something triggered a major market drop in the coming months, would your retirement be ready or exposed? With inflation, market volatility, and ongoing global uncertainty, more families are taking a closer look at whether their retirement plan is truly built to hold up. And many are finding that adding a layer of protection makes a lot of sense. Sanctuary Metals is a Christian-owned company that helps families strengthen their retirement savings with physical gold and silver through a gold IRA. During uncertain times, many people look to precious metals as a way to add stability when other assets may be under pressure. If you'd like to explore whether a gold IRA is a good fit for your situation, Sanctuary Metals makes it easy to get started. Text GUIDE to 94878 to receive your free Retirement Defense Guide or call 888-958-6579 to speak with one of their knowledgeable team members. Again, text GUIDE to 94878 or call 888-958-6579. I think there is a sense in which, you know, you usually hear this in terms of, well, with suicide, you have no context for repentance. And that's true. I mean, you know, obviously you can't repent of suicide. Right. At the same time, we would never say, let's say someone who dies in a, you know, some sort of an accident and they don't have time to repent of some of the sins they've committed that day. You don't say they would go to hell. So I think we need to be sure that we're not applying something to suicide that we wouldn't apply to everything else in that vein. Me, yeah, there can be authentic expressions of faith that would be saving faith. People can be doers of the word of God. They can exhibit all the fruit of the spirit. I'm not exactly sure I understand how suicide would come out of that. I would also just say that I don't think it precludes one from being actually saved. I don't see that in scripture. There are a couple of Bible verses that I know that people would debate me on, you know, but I would just point to somebody like Samson. He knew what he was doing. He's, you know, the spirit comes upon him. He pulls the pillars down. He gets that strength back, kills himself and everybody around him. You could argue that that's more of a coincidental suicide that he's trying to kill the rest of the people and just happens to die himself. I'm not sure that that distinction matters. And then some people would argue that suicide is the unforgivable sin. And I tend to think that that is a bit of an overreach. I agree. In my head, I feel like Jesus knows our struggles, right? He knows what we're facing internally. And he loves us through that, right? And so, yeah, I would say that was a reach too, but it's just something I've always struggled with, right? Like, it's, you know. It's difficult because the Bible doesn't approach it head on. And so I think there is some wiggle room there for conversation. But what I would just say is, we wouldn't apply that to anything else. And so I don't see any reason to apply it to suicide. Yeah. I fill that question in my mind, how would someone who has the Holy Spirit get to suicide? I would say, how does someone who has the Holy Spirit get to adultery? How does somebody, you know, you have all those other questions. And so I'm not sure we should single suicide out into all the rest of those sins. And that's sort of the logic I would tend to follow. Yep. I would just say that I think a lot of this medical assisted suicide, and even maybe suicide in general, maybe, I really think the autonomy issue goes further than even what we've talked about because we tend to view ourselves as sort of individual moral agents with no particular obligation to everybody else. As long as we're being moral and sort of, that can transform itself into being true to ourselves, which is a step away. But I think we have moral obligations. And that's part of the reason, I think, that we've lost this idea of redemptive suffering or suffering with a purpose. Is that now we're sort of in this moment where we can be so uncomfortable that it's really a detriment to ourselves. And it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks. It doesn't matter whether we have obligations beyond ourselves. It's that I'm uncomfortable, and so I should be able to not be uncomfortable. I'm uncomfortable a lot of the time. You know, I mean, we're all uncomfortable a lot, but we do the uncomfortable things because we have a duty to other people to do those uncomfortable things. Right. That sense of moral obligation and community of dignity beyond ourselves is really, I think, disrupted by this. That's where I think they've gone wrong with the Canadian sort of version of this, that government-authorized euthanasia is very much about a dignity in and of one singular person, right? That

The person gets to decide that their dignity is worth not being uncomfortable, but they don't think about it in terms of the dignity of humanity as a whole and the weight that should be given to losing this potential contributor to society. What could everyone else learn by watching this person suffer redemptively? What could this person bring and teach and add to society? And that's actually one of the things that has come up as an objection to the legislation in Canada, disability groups, people who work with people with disabilities, are kind of saying, this law seems extremely discriminatory. What it suggests is that people with disabilities should really be thinking about dying. Their life, they're not valuable enough. Right. And so there is an argument to be had there. I think there's something to be said about thinking through what is it that makes the Christian community uniquely well-positioned to, like James talks about in James 1.27, part of what it means to be, to practice pure and undefiled religion is to visit widows and orphans in their affliction. Well, that assumes that they are afflicted. And so what is it that makes us uniquely capable of doing that and how is it that we can be a community that cares not only for those who are healthy and strong and who could make the contributions that we tend to venerate, as opposed to also welcoming in the people who actually legitimately need some help but can make a contribution nonetheless. Right. And I think that's being lost in a lot of this legislation. Yeah, I agree. From your research, I know that you said there was a Christian group, but are there Christian groups and churches like advocating and speaking out against this and that you... Yeah, I mean, the Christian group I noted, also the Catholic Church has taken a position on this. I did not read through that full position, so I don't have a comment on it. But yes, I did see various churches and Christian groups sort of chiming in on some of this. And, you know, you do see the same variations that you would see in America around the abortion debate. And I think that to some degree, it's unfortunate that Christians don't have a unified voice on these matters. I know. That sort of slipped around a little bit and leaned more toward compassion and love and some sort of assumption of that than really fully understanding what it means to be in covenant with God and how it is that we're supposed to serve him and be wise in our dealings and, you know, show one another care and respect. Right. We've gone off the rails a little bit there. And so, but yes, there are other Christian groups there. Like I said, Catholic Church has chimed in on this. There are influences that are not happy with this in Canada. Yeah. Well, that's good. I don't think anything will change over there with the law, but it goes back to this question that I asked myself when horrible things happen or people do horrible things. It's like, why are we surprised? You know, we live in a culture where it's about what I want, me, me, me. Right. And if they don't know Christ, then they don't know what they should be serving and living to serve him. What I would just say is that, you know, for me, I never give up hope. I mean, I think the governments of the world have a really challenging task because they are trying to restrain evil, especially in pluralistic societies. They're trying to restrain evil without a clear moral code. Yeah. And so I say it like that because I'm not at all of the Christian nationalist bent. I don't like hearing when people say that, you know, like, let's say the United States was a Christian nation. I understand what they mean when they say it, that there was a huge Christian influence at the beginning and the founding of the United States and that many of the principles and ideas that flow into the constitution are biblically adjacent. Right. But to me, Christian should be reserved for things for which Christ is essential. Mm-hmm. And so to me, Christ is not essential to the way the structure of American government. And so they're trying to restrain evil without this sort of moral set moral. Yeah. And so where that tends to lead is when citizens are uncomfortable or in threat of being taken advantage of, which very much of this, as far as I can tell, a lot of this legislation in Canada was related to let's make sure that these people aren't taken advantage of as they're suffering. I think a previous iteration of this, there was a court case that came up that was the ruling of the time that was actually overturned later by a separate Supreme court in a separate case. They actually overturned the precedent, but I think it was a 2013 case, although I have to look at it. I think I was kind of, I saw that pop up. Like I was kind of reading it. The government or the Supreme court had just said, no, you can't do medically assisted death because we have suicide laws and suicide laws say that you can't assist someone in committing suicide. And so they classed the two together and so they had that for a while. Now it's sort of turned the other direction and they said, well, no, this, this medical assisted dying is a little different. And so I think there's, you know, I always think there's a way the governments can sort of swing the pendulum back. And the fact that they made this decision in the past and it seems to have devolved at this point to me is not like a spiral down into everything horrible you could possibly think of. It's going to require course correction. And hopefully what will end up happening is that the Canadian representatives, their Senate, their Congress, all those kinds of different things that they use. I don't think they call theirs a Congress, but you know what I mean? I have no idea. Yeah. Hopefully what'll end up happening is they'll, they'll get enough experience with this, that they'll realize that it is not good for their society and they'll come back and flip the script again. Right. But until that point, you know, it is a real problem and I think something that we should be looking at and concerned about. Right. From your research, could you tell where there are age restrictions? I mean, was it like you have to be like 21 and older or was it like 18? From what I read, it was 18 covered by a Canadian government healthcare. You know, they have a universal healthcare and there were a couple other criteria. The age requirement at 18, you know, that's a tough one. You know, to think that people's brains are fully formed at 18, I think is a slippery medical and biological fact. At the same time, you know, the line is drawn somewhere. At least there's a line for them. I would be concerned that that line will not hold and that some, at some point this may very well turn to parents and children. I agree. Like what if a child has cancer and they're, you know, it's inevitable that they're, they are going to die. Right. And they're really sick. Like, and as a parent, you're like, I don't want to watch my kid suffer. I want to apply to end his life. Like. Right. So we've got this sort of spectrum of belief. I mean, you know, they have their issues with abortion too, which I'm not, I didn't look at. Yeah. I'm not up to speed on. If we get to this point where we really do embrace this sort of autonomous individual logic too deeply, everything just becomes an autonomous choice for an individual. Right. And don't, wouldn't you kind of almost say that that's like that person playing God, right? Like I get to make my decisions. I get to impose my own will on myself and on my unborn child and impose my will on others because I read this quote one time that suicide ends the pain for you, but it gives it to everyone else. And while it might still be this medical route and your, your family knows about it, you're still ending your life and leaving your loved ones behind. And so, I mean, I guess they could say like, well, I'm going to die anyways, but. A dynamic it paints is it speaks to the lack of what we might call moral obligation. When even our clan, our closest group of people no longer really matters to us. And we're going to make a decision based on how we feel, not how they feel. It suggests that we have gotten far too individualistic as a society. We don't exist as individuals. We exist as social beings. And I'm not saying that our social world structure is in such a way that we can't escape it or anything like that. Like one of those sort of weird paradoxes where you sit back and you say, well, obviously I have free will. Obviously I have these rights. Obviously I could do what I wanted to do at this point. And yet I'm going to exercise some level of self-restraint of self-denial in order to serve the people around me, because I think it's better for us, even if it's not particularly better for me. And it, there's a great speech. I'm writing a couple of pieces on it, but 1978 Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who spent many years in the Russian gulags for criticizing Stalin and then was exiled from Russia and came over to the West, gives a commencement speech at Harvard university in 1978. And one of the things he talks about in that speech is this lack of or an over-legalistic society where right and wrong ultimately becomes determined by what is or is not legal. And that there's no higher force above that. And I think that's sort of what we're dancing around here is this idea that I wouldn't obviously advocate for this, but it's like, it doesn't really matter what the law is. It really doesn't. If individuals and groups of people would just say,

Right to do that, but we're not going to. Then in practice, it means nothing. Right. So you can imagine a scenario in which Canada is going to allow people to engage in assisted euthanasia and assisted suicide. But if nobody does it, okay. Right? It's on the books, but it hasn't had any impact or effect. Right. And so the real dynamics of this issue become, how is it that we as individuals are interacting with our own environment? Do we have a moral obligation, a religious obligation, and ultimately what I would hope for and what, you know, I think we work for in our ministry is a Christian obligation. Right. And I mean, even like, let's take religion out of it, right? Like you still, as a human, as an individual, you should have a moral compass, right? Like right and wrong. I agree. I mean, I think it would be great if people did. But I also think that without the Holy Spirit, without that transforming influence, that's why Christianity is, I think, the right answer. Let me ask you a serious question. If something triggered a major market drop in the coming months, would your retirement be ready or exposed? With inflation, market volatility, and ongoing global uncertainty, more families are taking a closer look at whether their retirement plan is truly built to hold up. And many are finding that adding a layer of protection makes a lot of sense. Sanctuary Metals is a Christian-owned company that helps families strengthen their retirement savings with physical gold and silver through a gold IRA. During uncertain times, many people look to precious metals as a way to add stability when other assets may be under pressure. If you'd like to explore whether a gold IRA is a good fit for your situation, Sanctuary Metals makes it easy to get started. Text GUIDE to 94878 to receive your free Retirement Defense Guide, or call 888-958-6579 to speak with one of their knowledgeable team members. Again, text GUIDE to 94878 or call 888-958-6579. Christians need to stop listening to the world and start listening to God so that thinking Christian becomes as natural as breathing. Welcome to the Thinking Christian Podcast. This is Dr. James Spencer. Through calm, thoughtful, theological conversations, Thinking Christian offers a mix of interviews and discussions that highlight the ways God is working in the lives of his people and question the underlying social, cultural, and political assumptions that keep the church from conforming more closely to the image of Christ. Now, on to today's episode of Thinking Christian. Hey everyone, this is Dr. James Spencer and you're listening to Thinking Christian. On today's episode, we have a guest host, Maggie Hubbard. Maggie works with me at Useful to God and was my co-host on our previous podcast, Faithful and Flawed. In this episode, Maggie and I talk about the Canadian Assisted Suicide Legislation. We take this following a new ruling by the Canadian courts in 2023. Given that it's Sanctity of Life Month, it seemed appropriate to re-air this episode. As we think about the sanctity of life, we have to recognize that while abortion is a major issue, other concerns will likely be on their way. America's had its fair share of assisted suicide cases, but it would be foolish to think that the matter is actually closed. Canada's position is problematic and should prompt Christians to think deeply about the sanctity of human life, even at the end of life. And I hope you enjoy this conversation in this episode of Thinking Christian. Because, you know, if you read through the Old Testament into the New, Israel had a moral code in the law. Like, they had a clear understanding of how they were supposed to be in the world. Right. It was legislative, it was moral, it governed all aspects of their life in a lot of ways. And they couldn't keep it. Yeah. And so the law was good, but it was also weak, because it could not get over the hump of human depravity. And so these moral codes, and I think this is part of the issue of, like, hey, let's get back to, you know, America, let's get back to a Judeo-Christian ethic. We need to think hard about that, right? As a governmental strategy and as a strategy to restrain evil, if we could all gather around a set of shared moral values, I think that would be a good thing. I would be for it. But we have to recognize its limitations, too. We had it, and it didn't work. Yeah. Right? The practicality of it is important. The utility of it is important, but we have to recognize that it is not the end-all, be-all solution. That's Christ. Right. All this ends in death no matter what. The only solution to death is resurrection. And so there is something to, yes, we should all have a moral code, and that would be amazing. But there's always going to be that slippage because Christ wants to free us from our selfish ambitions. Yeah. Even with that, we still fail. We still sin. Are there people that probably would debate, like, the free will choice? Like, God gave us free will, so it's my free will to end my life. I haven't heard that argument. People make all sorts of arguments. Yeah. I think that when it comes to the end of life and the same reason that we sort of struggle with if somebody commits suicide, are they still saved, there's a finality to it that even those normal free will arguments of, well, I should be able to choose to do whatever I want to do and however I want to do it, whatever, people generally stay away from, you know, ending of a life as a free will choice because it is so final and it is so drastic. Right. And so I haven't heard that argument as yet, but I think taken to its logical extension, all those free will arguments sort of get there. Because when you root a philosophy in the autonomy of the individual, you really don't have a lot of wiggle room to say, well, it's autonomous to a point, right? And so we've got to have sort of this both-and of, yes, the individual is free within constraints. And that's the trick. That's what the government is supposed to be doing. We're supposed to be free within constraints, right? The reason I can't drive 100 on the highway. Yeah, exactly. And it's like, yes, we have free will, but you're not going to go out and murder. You still have these moral laws that you live by and this kind of, like, moral lens as a Christian and as a non-Christian, right? Like, you hope that people live by this moral compass and this what's good and what's bad. Yeah, I think people recognize, whether they're moral or not, they recognize that there is some sort of a utility in the world not being complete chaos. Right. Order has its advantages. And so what we're dealing with now, I think, in a lot of ways, in the same way we would talk about it with medically assisted suicide in Canada, we could look at it in the abortion debate in the United States. We could look at it with the diversity, equity, inclusion kind of stuff we're working through in the United States as well, is that the order that has been established works really, really well for some people and doesn't work really, really well for others. We see it working really, really well for other people. And we go, well, why doesn't it work that well for me? That's a point of discomfort. We're seeing the brokenness of the world in a different way than other people might. And so we're asking, not only, why is it that I'm feeling this and other people aren't, but also, why is it that no one cares that I'm feeling it and other people aren't? Right. How can I work to fix it? And I think reading it in that way, I've found, for me personally, it's the most generous way that I can possibly read these situations. Is that what everybody's trying to sort of jockey around is, I feel the brokenness of the world in a very particular way and I don't want to. Right. So now what I want to do is I want to run to a strategy that is going to minimize my sense of that brokenness. And some of these sort of things that are coming to pass are that. I mean, applied to any debate we want to, what we're seeing is people on the other side of the debates we're having in any of those sort of topic areas and probably a myriad of others. They're just seeing the world as differently broken than we are. Right. And then they're jumping to solutions that are not Christ. Right. That's sort of how I tend to look at these issues as they come up. Yeah, that's good. It's like we all see it as broken, but ultimately the solution for us as Christians and that we hope that the world sees is the Savior, and it's Christ. Right. And I think that's where we, if Christians are not, I always want to bring this back to the proclamation of the gospel, I think. I think it's really important because politics is not my shtick. Right. I'm a theological geek. And so at the end of the day, the gospel is the thing for me. And so I think that, you know, there's definitely reason for Christians to participate and advocate for moral policies that would more align with human dignity as defined in the Bible in government. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do that. But what I would also say is that we have to be very careful not to represent that those governmental policies or laws are a solution. Or probably a better way to say it is they're a solution to a very particular.

Right. They're helping to restrain evil within the world. They are not helping with the brokenness of the world. Right. It's a band-aid. That's right. And so we have to be, as Christians, the only message, the most unique message we can convey is the gospel of Jesus Christ, pointing people to him. And so I think we have to be very careful when we're talking about these things, not to be sort of milquetoast about it and say, well, live and let live. Hey, let's talk about Jesus, but to be firm in what we believe, but not rude, to be gracious, to be understanding so that we have opportunities to point other people to Christ. Right. At the end of the day, that is our goal. Yep. We don't fix this thing through policy. No. Well, this is a great chat. Definitely something. I mean, when I saw that, I was like, goodness gracious, what? I don't know if I want to use the word interesting, but it would just be, I don't know, unique to watch how it unfolds and see how the church can rise up. I think they have a unique opportunity here to really step in and share the gospel. Yeah, definitely. To those that need it and in a broken world and pray that people that feel like they have no hope that they have to end their life. Right. Pray that there would be some kind of intervention because like I said, we've had family members and I've had friends, you know, struggle with it. And I can't understand, but I can sympathize. It's a really sad situation. Just pray that they would know Christ and get the help that they need. Just a side note. I do think that we have a pretty serious mental health issue in this country. I mean, in this world, you know, I battle with anxiety and depression and just here in Kansas City, I've called like, I don't know, five places and they all have waiting lists and you can't get in. And it's like, I mean, what if someone like, you know, so it's like a, yeah, I mean, on top of, you know, Christ and I, you know, I think that there needs to be some more help surrounding like mental health help too, because it's just, I don't know, just seems like it's getting worse. It would be a great topic for us to discuss because I think there's reasons that we're in that position now and it isn't just related to, you know, sort of post pandemic stress disorder. I think it's a bigger movement toward decadence. I don't think our digital world is actually helping us. I 100% agree. I know that you, you know, sent me that study, but I have a good friend that works in healthcare in the ER department. And we were talking about that and a lot of like teen attempted suicide is related to social media or phones. Yeah. I think little more, even more innocent things. Watching a screen past a certain time at night messes with your serotonin levels in your brain. Yep. It doesn't even matter what you're watching. You'd be watching, you know, you could be reading your Bible on the screen. I think there are a lot of things. It would be a great topic of conversation to kind of go forward with and think through because it is going to be a problem, I think for the church and the way we address it, I think will require more than just mental health. Right. You and I are a part of a campaign that launches at the beginning of the year. Go dark, shine bright campaign. And that's a social media, a media detox. And I think it would be beneficial to do an episode on kind of those findings that we've found and technology and cell phones. I mean, it, it's been a blessing, you know, but it's, I think that's our fall. You know? Yeah. It's definitely a pain and a blessing. And the trick is always like anything, how much of a downside are we willing to tolerate in order to reap the benefits of the upside? And right now we're, we're tolerating it. We're starting to see more and more downside and we're going to have to figure this out. Christians need to stop listening to the world and start listening to God. So the thinking Christian becomes as natural as breathing. Want to take just a second to thank the team at life audio for their partnership with us on the thinking Christian podcast. Life audio. Looking for ways to stay positive. Brighten your day with the free story behind podcast. Hear weekly short stories that showcase true joy, love and hope. Listen now at lifeaudio.com or by searching for story behind wherever you get your podcasts.