An article over at CSN starts thus:
President Obama’s top science adviser said in a book he co-authored in 1973 that a newborn child “will ultimately develop into a human being” if he or she is properly fed and socialized. “The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being,” John P. Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, wrote in “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”
What does that mean? It means if we kill newborn infants it's not really killing, just terminating a fetus. This is a page out of the playbook of Peter Singer, the Philosopher at Princeton University who fights for animal rights but believes killing newborns is cool. He says since babies can't enunciate their preferences they aren't human...yet. "Killing a newborn is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who really wants to go on living." If the state of being a being depends on strength, mental acuity or the amount a person contributes to society, why not decide for them? Singer took that line of reasoning from the third Reich scientists. It now finds its home in our presidents new science guy.
But wait there's more. John Holdren also authored a paper suggesting that trees should have legal rights. That's right our presidents science advisor hopes for the day when trees will have the legal standing to sue others in court. I am not making this up. He says, "this would have a most salubrious effect on the quality of the environment." I think anyone who uses the word "salubrious" has gotta be a pompous jerk. In this case it only adds to him being evil. I had to go look salubrious up. It means "favorable to health and well being."
How far we wander from the truth once we reject it. I think it was Chesterton who said, "When people stop believing the truth they don't believe in nothing but they begin to believe anything."
So lets get this straight. The president's top advisor on science and technology believes that babies are only "potentially human" but that trees should have rights? God have mercy on our nation.
0 comments:
Post a Comment