Recently I was discussing medical matters with a friend. The friend is a successful small businessman, a decent fellow and well regarded all round. Both his wife and mine have medical backgrounds and the conversation turned to my recent experience of returning from Westmead Children's Hosptial when overtaken by a rapidly moving NETS ambulance (I think 'Neo-natal Emergency Transport Service').
We discussed the increase in disabled people brought, to some extent, by increasing success in sustaining premature and disabled babies. My friend made the remark "I believe in natural selection; I think its best all round". Meaning, of course, that death should be allowed to those who can't survive without medical assistance.
Interesting how the idea of natural selection appears to produce this sentiment in an 'ordinary' bloke. It seems incongruous to hold that God could have adopted 'evolution' as a creative mechanism when one of its drivers is a servant of death, that falls to hand in arguments against the inconveniences of life. Hitler had a similar view of disabled people, I understand.
It is hardly credible then that God, who is the source of life, not death, would use something that courts death to produce life. This is not a theological paradox, because it has no biblical support, it is simply an inversion of God's revelation of his nature and the creation as it left his hand.
