In the first part I sought to tease out the basis for Dawkins’ claim that what he said “follows logically from the ordinary pro-choice stance.” It is to the reader to decide if my analysis is correct, and if not, what the real basis is. It is important, however, to understand that Dawkins is not …
No one wants to be told that they cannot play with their toy. No one wants to be told that their toy might even be dangerous in certain contexts–like the child that wishes to play baseball in the living room does not like being told to take the baseball bat and ball into the field, where that toy is more appropriate–or, that they shouldn’t bash people in the head with the baseball bat.
Today’s headline on the Drudge Report did not surprise me in the slightest: ABORTED BABIES INCINERATED TO HEAT HOSPITALS The article linked to is this one in the Telegraph: Aborted babies incinerated to heat UK hospitals: The remains of more than 15,000 babies were incinerated as ‘clinical waste’ by hospitals in Britain with some used …
Limbaugh and others are correct in detecting the eugenics thinking behind this comment but do not go far enough in their explanation. The problem is that a moment’s thought, especially amongst those with only a passing knowledge of the phrase ‘eugenics’, would recall that early 20th century eugenics had essentially embraced Darwin’s formula, “Survival of the fittest.” Given that evolution, as expressed in this maxim, was a raw scientific fact, early eugenicists saw the genetically inferior as a burden on society that needed to be eliminated. So how was Gruber being like a eugenicist if he was targeting the genetically fit?
It may seem hard for some of us to learn that Planned Parenthood submitted abortion on demand as a population control measure, and was even willing to consider compelling women to get abortions, but that is precisely what they did. Whether or not this remains their agenda, of course we’ll never know, because, like the Enemy, they lie.
With ‘Quality Adjusted Life Years’ and other such criteria for determining when to spend money on old people right around the corner (if not already here… *ahem* IPAB *ahem*), I found it ironic to see these two news items running at the same time today: When the 87-year-old resident of Glenwood Gardens collapsed at the …
This can’t end well. And when it does end in tyranny–and I’m pretty sure it will, although I don’t know when exactly–it will be because of dolts like those I just featured in this blog post who created the conditions and actually carried out the acts that facilitated it. And when it happens, they’ll look around, surprised, “How did this happen? This isn’t what I had in mind! I had good intentions! This foul result has nothing to do with anything that I did… put me in power again and I’ll do it right this time…”
Should States Decide Which Lives are Worth More than Others? A response to Jaime King’s Article In Nature Magazine
In the November 2012 issue of Nature professor Jaime S. King has an article titled “Politics and fetal diagnostics collide.” The summary: “Without better regulation, non-invasive prenatal genetic tests will be targeted by US anti-abortion lobbyists.” For the record, I have notified Professor King of this post. UPDATE: She has replied and says she will …