[csaa-forum] bolt is a powerful nut
S.Lovell at griffith.edu.au
Fri Dec 3 09:35:03 CST 2004
I've never contributed to the list befoer, being an enlightened lurker, but
I can't resist saying that I think 'glib' is a natural defence mechanism -
the question is how do we move past it into significant opposition? This
email came to me from another list and indicates quite clearly, I
think, the dangers of a right that goes un-opposed!
from another list:
> <<New York Daily News - Ideas & Opinions - Lion Calandra Women's health
> deserves more than prayers.url>> Scary Stuff
> Women's health deserves more than prayers
> FDA needs to lose doc who wrote the book on Bible therapies
> By LION CALANDRA
> Imagine this: Cindy and her charming prince ride off into the sunset. They
> marry. They have a baby. Cindy gets depressed. At the advice of her
> godmother, she goes to a doctor, who prescribes a healthy dose of ...
> A fractured fairy tale? In "Stress and the Woman's Body," a book written
> Dr. W. David Hager with his wife, Linda, women are advised to read
> Scriptures to treat such ailments as headaches and PMS. For headaches,
> Matthew 13:44-46. For PMS, Romans 5:1-11. Such suggestions would normally
> enough to have someone branded a quack. But when the Food and Drug
> Administration's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee meets next
> week, Hager will be one of its members. He was appointed by the Bush
> administration in 2001 and will have the gig until June. That is, of
> unless Bush taps him to run the FDA, an appointment that would not require
> congressional approval.
> The committee, meeting for the first time since 2001, is expected to
> a new Procter & Gamble drug for the treatment of low sexual desire in
> menopausal women. And how will Hager view it? A doctor who believes in God
> as the last word in healing is sure to put medical breakthroughs on the
> burner. Time magazine reported that two sources familiar with his practice
> say Hager refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.
> This doctor has checked the Hippocratic Oath at the church steps, choosing
> to ignore hard-won scientific gains and opting for a sort of therapeutic
> The advisory panels of the FDA often have near-final say. So, if Hager
> policy decisions based on the Bible, what does that mean for women's
> medicine? That only Christian women can be cured? What about Jewish and
> Muslim women - or agnostics?
> He's the last person who should be making recommendations on women's
> to a governmental agency. A woman's body should not become the battlefield
> for an ethical war of religion vs. science.
> Prayer is not a cure for postpartum depression. Beatitudes cannot treat
> bulimia (Corinthians 2 10:2-5). If Hager follows his own pattern and bucks
> standard medical practice, women affected by his recommendations can no
> longer expect to live happily ever after.
> Calandra is a News copy editor
At 09:18 PM 2/12/2004 +1000, you wrote:
>My glib reply was a weak attempt to console myself that the state of this
>country is indeed a joke. Thinking about the reality of Australia's
>growing right is absolutely depressing. Too depressing in fact. If only
>academics, with all their decreasing might and dwindling fiscal
>reservoirs, could change the status quo. Soon we will be as obsolete as logic.
>discussion list of the cultural studies association of australasia
School of Arts, Media and
S.Lovell at griffith.edu.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the csaa-forum