Charlie didn't die of a rare depletion syndrome. He died at the hands of a nefarious political agenda. I'm not writing this for subtle gain, I'm writing to expose what we've lost. I'm politicizing Charlie Gard because Charlie is a victim of political abuse.
Yes, I'm typing in Comic Sans font (which you might not see on a phone.) It looks something like what you'd see in a coloring book or on a baby bib. Not what you'd expect in a politically-charged assertion exposing the oppressive nature of a socialized ideology that boasts a compassionate narrative while killing the very constituents it swears to protect. But sometimes even letters can be an illustrative aid to exposing a precious truth.
So for sweet Charlie Gard, I write in Comic Sans.
I'm a journalist. I'm nobody special, just one of the many who followed the Charlie Gard story. One of the greatest challenges in journalism is being objective. Anyone can publish their opinion. But the art of objectivism is informing your audience, divorced from bias, in a way that equips them to formulate their own candid position.
But sometimes objectivism is hard.
When you're closely monitoring this story line it becomes difficult to isolate your emotions. You become invested. You start seeking validation and justice. Why did this happen? Is someone or something (or both) to blame?
The answer is yes. Socialized healthcare literally strips the power from competent individuals and allows disinterested figures to dictate what's best for the vulnerable. Notice the contrast between disinterested figures and parents.
The common narrative says we should grieve first and politicize later. "Don't make it about you," goes the narrative. But sadly, when "later" comes people will have moved on to a new story with a new narrative and a new emotional investment, at which point even the most well-crafted arguments against the old issue will fall on deaf ears.
Why isolate grief from politicization?
Why shouldn't they coexist?
Why can't we take this moment of revelation to push for the very reform that would have prevented this tragedy?
I'm not writing this for subtle gain, I'm writing to expose what we've lost. I'm politicizing Charlie Gard because Charlie is a victim of political abuse. This isn't an issue that is loosely tied to politics through rhetorical gymnastics. No, Charlie is a 1st-tier casualty of a system that allows judicial invasion of the most valuable asset in our society; family.
Charlie's parents, Chris and Connie, applied to have Charlie released from Great Ormond Street Hospital seven months ago to seek experimental treatment– treatment that takes three months to conduct. Do the math and you'll see that Charlie could have received it twice over before the legal battle was complete and their application denied. Would he have survived if he was treated seven months ago? I don't know. But his chances would have been much greater. Regardless, do we see what's happening here? A judge told coherent parents that they have to let their child die.
Charlie didn't die of a rare depletion syndrome. He died at the hands of a nefarious political agenda. When individual rights are sacrificed on the alter of bureaucracy, the judiciary becomes the parents.
Let's take note.
Hi, my name is John and I love coffee. As I write this I’m sitting in a local roastery sipping a “mudslide” espresso with cream and two and a half sugars. There are few things in life that I feel merit precise orchestration with no room for error, coffee is one of them.
My life belongs to Jesus. I am his son and He is my King. His work in my life is reason enough for my faith to be made complete. He lived to die for me so that I may be credited righteous thus I will live for Him. I believe one area that has been greatly ignored by Christians is culture and politics. We must be active in representing our faith in these communities, but not in a relativistic or compromising way. See full bio