The Prodigal Son and Healthcare

No, I have not gone crazy! However, as this healthcare debate rages I am increasingly reminded of the larger context of the "Prodigal Son" text in Luke 15. There, Jesus shares three back to back parables that are, according to the author, meant to confront the attitudes of religious leaders who are upset because Jesus chooses to hang out with "sinners."It is especially important for the reader to remember that in Jesus' time, the term "sinner" was applied to a number of people, often including the physically ill since it was commonly believed that physical illness and disability were evidence of divine judgment because of sin. It is also important to note that the first two parables "The Lost Coin" and"The Lost Sheep" preceding the intentionally climactic parable of the" Prodigal Son" illicit no reaction from the crowd. This "silence" is intentionally built into the narrative of the three parables by the writer to prepare the reader for the main point that only comes at the end of the last parable , "The Prodigal Son". As one would expect, the religious leaders are perfectly comfortable with the idea that a person would do whatever it takes to recover a lost sheep or a lost coin. After all, these are sources of considerable revenue in the Jewish culture. The lost coin, for example, was probably meant to invoke images of a woman's dowry that would be given to a groom at the time of marriage. Similarly, the wool from sheep would have provided a substantial source of revenue for herders. Therefore, no one in the crowd would have been surprised by the passion expressed in these fervent searches. The tension arises only when Jesus offers The Prodigal Son as a point of intended climax. Like most Middle Eastern cultures of the time, Israel was very communal . While the prophets of old such as Ezekiel had previously sought to bring balance to the tension between the individual and community, in reality, an individual's worth was largely determined by his or her impact on the community as a whole even in Jesus' time. Given this intense focus on the community, one could understand why the Prodigal Son would have been viewed as something less than human after his grievous transgression of betrayal. It has been argued that the father likely ran to the son not simply a matter of excitement and joy (though this was certainly present), but also as an act of protection for the repentant son. If anyone else had seen the son approach the house first, it is likely he may have been killed or in the very least viciously attacked. After all, he had shamed the family name. This is a most serious offense in Middle Eastern cultures. There is a reason the son had planned to ask for nothing more than servant status; it was THE MOST he could expect from his father given the circumstances HE had created. Thus,when Jesus narrates the totally unexpected response of mercy and forgiveness it likely stunned the larger crowd, and most certainly angered the religious leaders at whom Jesus' comments were specifically directed. After all, they held sinners in high disdain. They had wrongly accused Jesus of being a false prophet, and Jesus' parable turned this argument on its head. if there is one message that the Prodigal Son teaches, it teaches that God values all individuals totally and completely apart from their perceived value to the society at large. It is important to remember that people such as the disabled who would not be considered "sinners" by today's standards would have been put virtually on the same level as the Prodigal Son who sinned deliberately and intentionally This is why the "lame" (physically disabled) were excluded from temple worship with other legitimate sinners. in the end, the major difference was that the disabled had the right to beg for alms! When Jesus told this amazing parable, he, once and for all,defended the inherent value of the individual apart from his or her perceived contribution to society at large. It is little wonder that the self-righteous religious leaders were not too keen on Jesus' teaching. After all, they thought they were something special based on their "outstanding" morality alone! In contrast, Jesus maintained true righteousness only comes through grace exemplified by repentance. Our Declaration of Independence like the Prodigal Son rightly proclaimed that all are created equal and thus inherently valuable in their own right. When we have taken this premise seriously, our nation has prospered. When we have ignored it or violated it in our treatment of certain minorities, we have suffered greatly.The biggest problem with the healthcare debate is that it will necessarily place the state in the position of once again making value judgments about the worth of individuals based on their perceived value to society at some future point. While it is true that Obama has denied that his plan would lead to healthcare rationing, his health-care czar Ezekiel Immanuel has written extensively on this issue and has openly admitted that especially in times of economic hardship (like now) that rationing would have to be undertaken. See http://www.nypost.com/seven/07242009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/deadly_doctors_180941.htm?&page=1. I am not suggesting that Obama is intentionally promoting healthcare rationing, or worse yet, some form of eugenics. However, I am suggesting that Obama is choosing to ignore the very real concerns people have until after a bill is passed. It is not enough for Obama to say that he does not wish to ration care. He must instead convince the American people that his plans could never lead to such injustices even after he leaves office. It is especially troubling that Obama continues to appoint Czars who have held these extreme views and yet we are expected to simply ignore their writings in favor of what Obama is saying now. My question is, if Obama is serious about not allowing healthcare rationing, then why is Emanuel his health-care czar. Why would he not, in the very least, appoint someone who has not expressed previous beliefs in rationing? Despite the very real problems with the insurance companies, the medical profession has been the one place citizens have expected to be treated with equity. They do not expect one person to get good treatment and another person to be neglected. despite isolated problems, doctors by and large do their best to act like the father in the story and do their best for their patients regardless of their contribution, (or lack of contribution), to the society at large. The shortage of doctors that would be created by a national healthcare program would ultimately require rationed care simply because there will not be enough doctors in the healthcare system to keep up with the additional millions of people that would have to be covered under a national healthcare plan. This will ultimately place the government in the tenuous position of deciding who is most worthy of the best care. The people at greatest risk will ultimately be the elderly and disabled. Further, this need for rationing that is bound to occur will most likely be used as a platform for promoting abortion, especially in pregnancies where evidence of birth defects are present. Why are people so fired up about the healthcare plan? Is it based on hate for Obama or Congress? No, it is because all proposed versions of healthcare reform currently available for review remove a cornerstone of American life that Jesus best articulated in the Prodigal Son parable: because all people are inherently valuable to God, we are inherently responsible to value others totally and completely apart from their perceived economic value to the society of large. No, Americans have not always lived consistently with the values they espouse. However, we have sought to right the wrongs throughout the years. It is important that we do not allow our government to forsake this important cornerstone of modern democracy that all people are created equal regardless of their physical condition or contribution to society. If the Prodigal Son were a real person alive today, I believe he would beg us not to travel this road but to maintain and protect our belief that all people are truly "created equal with certain inalienable rights."