You may have heard of Charlie Gard, the 10-month-old baby who was born with severe brain damage and an inability to move or breathe on his own. He has been on life support at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London since he was born. Earlier this year, Charlie’s doctors concluded that he was terminally ill and that nothing more could be done for him.

After doing extensive research, Charlie’s parents found a doctor in the United States who thought he could help Charlie with a certain type of medication. The medication has never been tried on anyone with Charlie’s exact condition; however, the medication was successful on another individual who had a condition that was similar to Charlie’s.

In order to raise funds so that Charlie could be transferred to the United States for treatment, Charlie’s mother set up a GoFundMe page on the internet. To date, she has been able to raise more than $1.7 million for the experimental treatment.

Even though Charlie’s parents have the desire and financial ability to transfer him to the United States for treatment, the administrators at Great Ormond Street Hospital took it upon themselves to stop the parents. In April, the hospital filed a court case with the family division of the High Court of Justice in London. The question that the hospital presented to the court was, “Is it legal, and in Charlie’s best interest, for the hospital to remove him from life support — even against his parent’s wishes?” After a hearing on the matter, the judge ruled in favor of the hospital and against Charlie’s parents, stating that it was “in Charlie’s best interests” to allow the hospital to withdraw treatment, which would result in Charlie’s death.

Charlie’s parents appealed the judge’s decision to the Court of Appeals of England and Wales. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the judge. Charlie’s parents then appealed the case to the United Kingdom Supreme Court. That court subsequently upheld the judge’s decision.

In a last-ditch effort to reverse the judge’s decision, Charlie’s parents appealed the case to the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasburg, France. In their appeal, Charlie’s parents argued, among other things, that Charlie’s right to life was being violated. On Tuesday, June 27, the European Court ruled that because there was such a small likelihood of successful treatment in the United States, it was in Charlie’s best interest to put an end to his suffering by allowing him to die.

After Charlie’s parents ran out of courts to appeal their case to, they requested that the hospital release their son so they could take him home. They wanted to give him a bath, cuddle with him, and lay him in a crib that he had never slept in. The hospital denied the parents’ request.

The parents pleaded with the hospital to delay removing the life support from their son until members of their extended family could make a final visit with Charlie. Despite the pleas of the parents, the hospital turned down their request to delay the death of their son.

The story about the inhumane behavior of the hospital and the courts quickly spread through social media and across the internet. By Friday, June 30, the hospital relented and agreed to delay Charlie’s death until after members of his extended family could pay a final visit. After the weekend, the hospital will withdraw all treatment and life support from Charlie, and he will be left to die in his bed.

This is what happens when a government is allowed to take complete control over the health care of its citizens. The citizens no longer have the legal right to choose what’s best for themselves and their children. They are forced to submit to the will of government bureaucrats who believe that they know what’s best for everyone else.

After I read the story about the way Charlie and his parents had been treated by the doctors, hospital, and court system, I remembered an observation that I had read a few weeks ago on the DCWhispers.com website:

What do Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Emmanuel Macron, Italy’s Paolo Gentiloni, Great Britain’s Theresa May, Holland’s Mark Rutte, Sweden’s Stefan Löfven, Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon, and the European Commission’s Jean-Claude Juncker all have in common?

The first is they are all leaders of nations/regions now suffering terrible Islamic extremism brought about by open-border immigration policies that they continue to support and demand be allowed.

The second is that none of them have children or grandchildren. Let that sink in. Europe is being led into oblivion by childless masters.

The absence of having children is not itself a condemnation of one’s ability to care about the future and yet to see so many childless political leaders now overseeing the fall of Western Europe at the same time makes for a rather remarkable and potentially troubling coincidence.

While the observation on the DCWhispers.com website about childless parents was worth considering, it left out an important fact: two of the greatest world leaders of the last century — Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul, II — were physically “childless,” yet they believed and acted as though they were the spiritual parents of every human being on Earth.

There are thousands of religious sisters, brothers, and priests who are childless, but still care deeply about the children and families they serve, as well as the countries where they reside. In addition, there are millions of people in the world who for some reason were unable to have children, but still have great love and affection for their brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, and other family members. In many cases, they treat certain members of their families as though they were their own children.

In my opinion, the leaders who do the most damage to our society are the ones (1) who do not believe in God (or have rejected God) and (2) who had the opportunity to have children and selfishly rejected the children that God had planned for them. As leaders, they are extremely dangerous because in their minds, they are the equivalent to gods who are superior to everyone else. They believe that they have the right and the obligation to control the behavior of other people, because they believe that other people are incapable of making the right decisions for themselves and their families.

The founding fathers of our country believed that each of us were created in the image and likeness of God, and that each of us has the God-given right to make decisions for ourselves and our families concerning life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The real danger to our society and our country are the godless leaders who believe that it’s their right and obligation to control and rule over us.

Food for thought while we celebrate the independence of our country.

SHARE