It's Not Medically Relevant: Ethics, Religion & Morality
Here is the place to discuss issues of ethics, religion and morality in House. Since there is a strong potential for hot button topics here, please be respectful in your posts. It's fine to say "I don't believe x" or "I don't understand how anyone could believe x." It's not fine to say "Anyone who believes x is an idiot." The fact that someone has different thoughts on religion, morality and/or ethics means you have the basis for an interesting discussion. It does not mean that the other person is deficient in some way because he or she does not agree with you. With that said, let's start discussing!

Unapologetic atheist. Nothing to discuss. :P

Well, that's true, but it kinda nips the conversation in the bud, doesn't it? ;-) We can also talk about the other characters and situations. Tonight's episode 97 Seconds was full of references to the afterlife, medical ethics, etc. And the dog died. Dude. That is just so wrong.

Unapologetic atheist here, as well. But I do have something to discuss. The atheist comment in tonight's episode ("97 Seconds") bothered me more than I think it should have. It just...pushed a button. If a religious person (from ANY religion) can quote an atheist philosopher or thinker or whatnot for whatever reason (I've personally heard it happen), surely an atheist can quote the bible, fictitiously or not. It's my belief that the label of "human being" comes before any other potential label given to a person. Telling someone they don't have the right to say or quote something because they don't believe in what you believe seems so...wrong to me. I don't like the Harry Potter books, but I have read a couple of them. If I quote them for whatever reason in whatever conversation, does that make what I said less valid? Less meaningful or real? I don't think it does. I know that's a bad comparison, but it's all I could come up with. The comment really turned me off to, um, Mormon-Foreman. (Forgive me, I don't remember his name and number.) And now I'm shutting up, because this is a very touchy subject for me. OH! But I want to agree about the dog! I mean, it was almost right that he died after his owner did -- kind of shows the connection between the two, I think, but it was still so terribly sad. I cried more for the dog than I did for the human. I'm very, very, very sentimental when it comes to animals, dogs in particular. Ah, it gets me teary just thinking about it! Curses, House, curses!

The atheist comment in tonight's episode ("97 Seconds") bothered me more than I think it should have. It just...pushed a button. If a religious person (from ANY religion) can quote an atheist philosopher or thinker or whatnot for whatever reason (I've personally heard it happen), surely an atheist can quote the bible, fictitiously or not. It's my belief that the label of "human being" comes before any other potential label given to a person. Telling someone they don't have the right to say or quote something because they don't believe in what you believe seems so...wrong to me. I totally agree with you on this one and I'm not an atheist. The Bible can be looked at as a great work of philosophy or even literature. Also, biblical quotes are part of our lexicon in the same way we pick up bits from other languages. Why shouldn't House be able to quote it?

Unapoligetic Christian here but I agree with you about the quoting issue. Anyone should be able to quote whatever they want. My father was a minister for a long time and he gave me my fairly liberal views on religion. I've been taught since birth to be a witness for people but it's something that I've always struggled with, it seems like asking me to force my views down someone's throat and I don't want to do that. I would hate if an atheist tried to convince me that I was wrong or stupid because of my beliefs and I cannot do the same to other people. I'm open to discussing my beliefs but the last thing I want to do is shove a Bible in someone's face if they don't want to hear it.

LMC, I wish everyone was brought up to be respectful of other spiritual practices. I love a good discussion of religion, but try to force me or tell me I'm wrong and my hackles rise. I think everyone probably feels the same way. In the same way the Mormon doctor was disrespectful to House about quoting the Bible, House was pretty darn disrespectful to the patient about his belief in the afterlife.

fffaw: Exactly! That's really what I was trying to point out, you just did much more articulately than I could. Thank you. LightMyCandle: That's how I feel as well. There's no use in trying to shove your beliefs down someone's throat. And they're your (and that's a general "your.") beliefs, anyway. Keep them for yourself, for your own personal benefit. Share them when asked, and do it as nicely as possible. One of my best friends is a devout Christian. And I mean devout. Yet we get along perfectly because we don't discuss religion, and if we do, it's done maturely and rationally. We listen to each other, and if things get a bit heated (like when she tried to quote Anselm to me, and I wouldn't hear it because she was literally calling me a fool), we agree to disagree and let it go. That's the difference between discussions and arguments: rationality. That's difficult to find in both the extremes of atheism and theology. It's all about being open-minded and tolerant, I think. If you can't keep your mind open in a discussion, there's no discussion to be had.

If you can't keep your mind open in a discussion, there's no discussion to be had. You hit the nail on the head. It's no longer a dialogue, but two monologues!

House reads everything (and he thinks about everything.) Of course he has read the Bible. If he has rejected religion it is not out of ignorance but because the concept doesn't work for him. Faith, by definition means believing in something that cannot be proven by empirical methods. For him, empiricism is everything. Actually, one of my favorite things about House is that they present many different views on religion without judging. (House judges, but I think the writers try not to.) Among the main cast members we have House & Cameron - atheists Wilson & Cuddy - Jewish (presumably secular Jews. Their religious beliefs haven't really been discussed.) Foreman - believer Chase - former and possibly current believer. His prayer for Mikey in Forever indicates a believer. His position in Informed Consent and his conversation with Foreman at the end of House Training indicate someone who is still examining his beliefs. Among guests, unless the person is religious, I think it tends not to be a topic of discussion. Among those who were religious, there was: Sister Augustine - Damned If You Do Henry - Sex Kills (presumably. He does go to church.) Grace - House vs. God Rodney Foreman - Euphoria Marina - Human Error I don't think the show depicted any of them as fools for believing. In House vs. God, Boyd was shown to be a charlatan, but the score ended up tied with Chase ably defending the religious point of view (You say “won the lottery,” he says, “miracle.”) The one time I think they truly messed up was in One Day, One Room. While I personally agree with House's opinion, the idea that he browbeat a woman who believed that abortion is murder into terminating was... nasty. As she had only been raped a week before, she had almost 3 months in which to decide on whether or not to keep the baby. It would have been much better if, at the end, House had told Cuddy and Wilson that Eve was considering her options, leaving us (and House) in the dark as to what she finally decided. BTW, agnostic secular Jew with strong atheistic leanings here. ETA: fixed the patient in Human Error's name.

I never got the impression that they were saying abortion was evil in Fetal Position. My memory isn't all too clear as to what happened, so I might have the details wrong (although I didn't see the finger grab as any message, just a touching -ha!- and some would argue manipulative- House can be affected second worth of time). There were no moral arguments against the abortion. Emma(?) had just been through too many miscarriages and wasn't willing to give up, Cuddy advocated for her. House didn't change his mind about abortion and even argued that Cuddy was still wrong, even after they saved both the mother and baby. And, everyone else argued with Cuddy. The question of whether abortion was morally right or wrong wasn't an issue in the episode, from my view. I found there was much more pushing an agenda in One Day, One Room. For the same reasons Poeia was annoyed, I was annoyed. It was the only thing about the episode that I didn't like. Well, actually, I was much more annoyed that there was no balance. That episode seemed to say loud and clear that abortion was the only right or intelligent choice. Even if House had stuck to his belief that she was a fool for her beliefs and she stuck to them (I also don't agree with the theory that she really wasn't strong or sure of what she believed. Nothing in the episode said to me that she wasn't completely clear as to what her philosophy was) that would be fine. But, the fact that the only person who felt that abortion was wrong got her mind changed, seemed to be a much clearer message that the writers were calling pro-lifers irrational and stupid. So, I actually like that they had an episode like Fetal Position. Helps keep things balanced.

I didn't think, in Fetal Position, they were making an anti-abortion statement. I thought they were trying to show something touching House's hard, hard heart. They did it well in Autopsy. But in Fetal Position I felt like TPTB had borrowed Monty Python's 16-ton weight and dropped it on our heads.

I thought One Day One Room was a bit cavalier at the end. Cuddy justs pops in and says 'everything's hunky dory, she's had an abortion'. Just whacking on the end didn't seem wise from a scriptwriting perspective. It was a story about rape and bad things. It should have stopped there, not just had the abortion tossed in as a throwaway line. I know House and the girl talk about abortion, but I think if she did it or not should have been left open not tacked on with sticky tape as an afterthought. I suspect it probably was meant to get a bit more space, but ran out of time.

I'm completely agnostic when it comes to Higher Powers and the afterlife, but from a moral standpoing I'm a pure idealist. Do whatever you want, as long as it doesnt hurt others. There are, of course, tricky situations, but that's the compass. In regards to House, I'm not sure how to interpret his anger at everyone and everything religous. Why does it bother him so much? It's as if he's taking it personally, somehow. Could it be, and I'm just speculating here, that he's not at ease with his atheism? I'm getting the feeling he wants the higher meaning to be there, but can't and wont act on anything not logic-driven. He wants proof.