Islam and Science - Author's Introduction

Islam and Science - Author's Introduction Introduction In the fall of 1980, Ronald Reagan swept the U.S. presidential election ahead of his opponent, Jimmy Carter, and Republicans returned to the forefront of the political scene with the presidency and then a majority in the Senate for the first time in almost a quarter of a century. Given that it was the conservative or religious trend that was credited with the first big victory, everyone expected to resolve the controversial issues at this time between conservatives and liberals, most notably the issue of abortion. A few months after Reagan took office, a Senate Judiciary Committee was formed to look into legislation, from which emerged a subcommittee to look into legalizing abortion by prohibiting or allowing the presidency of Senator John East of North Carolina. Throughout the months of April, May and June 1981, the committee heard a large number of scientists, lawyers, ethicists and political activists from both parties, and aimed to legislate when a child's life begins: from the moment an egg is fertilized or after? On the morning of Wednesday, May 20, 1981, he testified before this committee, Professor James Neel, head of the Department of Genetics at the University of Michigan School of Medicine and member of the National Academy of Sciences of America, in his speech, Professor Neel pointed out that it is impossible to address the subject of when human life begins without an introduction to the concepts of the theory of evolution, and that the human embryo goes through several stages as it grows inside the uterus, and then the scientific base says: Ontogeny It means that the fetus does not show any human signs except in the last stages of its development, and therefore it is only an evolutionary residue and does not have the anatomical and functional qualities that humans possess, and therefore also is not correct to be legally human and does not have the legal rights to humans such as the right to preserve his life until he reaches the last stages of intrauterine development. Accordingly abortion in the light of the theory of evolution in the words of the surgeon (George Crile) Ohio Of course, we have a completely different perspective in Islam, it is not permissible to abort the fetus after the breath of the soul in it, and because the breath of the soul can only be known through revelation, it is stated in the correct Hadith that it is 42 days after the life of the fetus. This is contrary to what Darwinian theory of evolution puts forward regarding when the fetus is a human being has the right to life and it is not permissible to attack this right and life, and when it is just a waste of the remnants of previous ancestors of worms, fishes, amphibians and reptiles and reptiles. This is about the difference between Islam and materialist philosophy regarding the beginning of life, what about the end of life? In 1979, the late Professor Joseph Fletcher, a medical ethicist, wrote an article criticizing the current definition of brain death as complete brain death, noting that those deprived of higher brain functions such as thinking and intelligence could not be considered persons regardless of whether other organs and vital systems function regularly, and regardless of whether their biological processes function only automatically, or, as he put it, "if the brain goes cerebrum and the brain stem remains normal." Fletcher used Darwinian evolutionary theory to argue that the brain that we inherited from our reptile ancestors is the brain stem that controls automatic functions such as heart rate, blood pressure and breathing, and the brain that we inherited from our mammalian ancestors is the midbrain that controls emotions and emotions. The current, decades-old definition of brain death[7] dictates that all brain function must stop functioning from the brain stem to the upper brain centers until brain death is declared[6], but in the 1990s calls from doctors and jurists to redefine brain death to include only the upper brain centers have been activated, thus reclassifying large numbers of coma patients as dead. In order to understand the context of these calls, we need to realize that there are two different perspectives on human nature and the definition of what man is, and that it is based on this difference in the two views very large implications with regard to patients with mental disabilities. There is a purely material view that views man and his mind as the product of the physical brain and no more that there is no soul, so the damage of the higher positions of the brain is not the truth of the individual and humanity. [1] Testimony of Dr. James Neel, May 20, 1981, in The Human Life Bill: Hearings before the Subcommitte on Separation of Powers of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-Seventh Congress, First Session, on S. 158, a Bill to Provide that Human Life Shall be Deemed to Exist from Conception, April 23, 24; May 20, 21; June 1, 10, 12 and 18. Serial No. J-97–16 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982), 77. [2] See: Dr. Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution: A Science or a Myth, Chapter IV: The Embryos of a Temple, The Centre of Brahmins, 2nd edition, 2018, pp. 107-138. [3] George Crile Jr., “When Does the Human Life Begin?” Medical Tribune, March 6, 1985, 22. [4] Joseph Fletcher, Humanhood, Prometheus Books, April 1, 1979, p. 135. [5] Ibid., pp. 163-164. [6] According to the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), see Alan D. Shewmon, “‘Brainstem Death,’ ‘Brain Death’ and Death: A Critical Re-evaluation of the Purported Equivalence,” Issues in Law and Medicine 14, no. 2 (Fall 1998): 125–45. [7] R. Hoffenbert, et. al., “Should Organs from Patients in Permanent Vegetative State Be Used for Transplantation?” The Lancet 350, no. 9087 (November 1, 1997): 1321. - Dr. Hisham Azmi — Source: Brahin Center website - Published on 2019-01-20 (archived at the Internet Archive) https://braheen.com/publications/intros/الإسلام-والعلم-مقدمة-المؤلف