Saturday, March 19, 2005

Life or Death: The Extinction of Man

As I was reading a fascinating piece called "Death By Environmentalism" by Robert James Bidinotto I kept thinking there was a much broader theme emerging. Mr. Bidinotto's article made it abundantly clear that rabid environmentalism clearly favors the extinction of the human animal from the face of the Earth. Groups like Earth First and E.L.F (Earth Liberation Front) make no apology with regard to their ultimate goal. While they, like Islamic terrorists, need to be taken seriously because they pose a real threat to anyone and anything they target, they are rightly considered the lunatic fringe by most clear thinking people. The overarching theme I saw emerging was really about who supports life for humanity, warts and all, and who supports death under its many guises.

In a litany of well-documented examples Bidinotto exposes the carnage inflicted on human life by enviromentalist driven policies and obstruction. Notably the reemergence of malaria as an epidemic due to the concerted effort to eradicate DDT from the Third World where it had nearly wiped out this menacing scourge. To save a few obscure species the environmentalists are willing to sacrifice millions of people, and mostly children at that. But that's exactly the point. In a theme that presents itself over and over we see an agenda that seemingly does not favor the continuation of the animal known as man. And when you examine what side of the political spectrum these people hail from the truth chills you to the core. Leftists, socialists and yes, even Democrats, favor death over life. There is one notable exception, but even that is telling...

If we go through each issue one by one the pattern is overwhelming:

Abortion - Pro-Choice, supported by the left, results in the death of the unborn. Pro-Life, supported by the right and the religious right, results in life and the perpetuation of the species.

Healthcare - Government controlled health systems supported by the left result in poor quality, rationing, deadly waiting periods, denial of procedures and access to medical testing equipment, subdued research and innovation all inevitably leading to premature death. Privately run, privately insured healthcare supported by the right results in the finest medical and pharmaceutical products in the world. There may be serious problems with the system itself, but where the profit motive has been allowed to be a factor we enjoy the most advanced medical testing equipment and the most advanced medicines in the world. Nearly all of the innovation in pharmaceuticals happens in the U. S. The end result is longer healthier lives for human beings.

Mercy killing - Doctor-assisted suicide is supported by the left. Nothing frightens me more than this one. This is the slipperiest of all the slippery slopes. Compassion for the terminally ill and especially those in severe pain may seem to make doctor-assisted suicide a merciful measure, but who will draw the line. The Dutch (the state) are now killing the elderly and deformed children. Keeping doctors and the medical system working to save and prolong human life is supported by the right.

AIDS policy - Condom distribution and clean needle programs supported by the left offer false hope and literally encourage dangerous behavior that ultimately results in death. Abstinence programs and AA-type programs supported by the conservative right and those with a belief in a higher power who looks with favor on mankind result in healthy, clean human beings.

Environmental policy on GM foods - The curtailing or banning of genetically modified and genetically enriched food supported by the left finds them in a paradoxical conundrum. By "building" crops that are naturally resistant to disease and infestation we would not only would we be able to feed more people we would do it without sacrificing even more forests and without chemicals. It sounds like a win-win situation, except for the - more people - part. The same leftists oppose genetically enriched food that even right now is aiding in the fight against malnutrition for Third World children. Why? Are they in favor of sick and dying children? Oh, am I being harsh? Again, why would anyone oppose modifying food that could save lives? The profit driven industry supported by the right, continues to research and bring more value to each acre of land cultivated for food crops. We now stand at the cusp of being able to end human hunger world-wide.

Environmental policy on global warming - The Kyoto Protocol supported by the left, ultimately intended to stifle America's economic might, would cost billions of dollars for a negligible effect on the climate. It would rob funds that could be used to build sanitation and public health systems in the emerging world. These efforts would save more lives and end more suffering than any perceived negative effect a couple of degrees increase in the mean temperature of the planet would have. A profit driven system of research and development of new products and systems that will allow a rising quality of life while minimizing the pressure on nature - supported by the right - is already achieving amazing results since the environmental enlightenment of 60's and 70's.

The "Peace" movement - The world-wide peace movement or anti-war movement if you will, which is enthusiastically supported by the left is the shakiest of all the leftist ideas. The whole ridiculous notion of being for "peace" is akin to being for "air". Yes, Virginia, war sometimes IS the answer. The liberation of millions of people over the centuries from tyranical, murderous dictators and regimes could only have been accomplished through war. What could possibly be the motivation for allowing tyrants like Napoleon Bonapart, Adolph Hitler, Joesph Stalin, Hiro Hito, Pol Pot and Saddam Hussein to continue their quests? The continued suffering and death of millions of human beings was at stake each time. For all it's ugliness war works. America's building, maintaining and yes, even using its awesome war machine, as incomprehensible as it seems, is ultimately humanitarian. We on the right support a large and strong military.

The death penalty - The end of the death penalty, supported by the left (let it be known the this writer does not support the death penalty for the simple reason that I support life and particularly the innocent ones) would seem to be the fly in my theoretical ointment. But wait, follow me with this one. The death penalty is applied to murderers; those who kill other human beings. While those on the left can be at peace with themselves supporting the killing of innocent pre-born babies they are beside themselves with despair when a cold-blooded killer is executed. The death penalty, supported by many on the right can be justified. In some situations even I would support it.

In example after example the left supports positions that do not necessarily favor the survival of the human species. We have to look no further than the glorification of a career over motherhood for the modern woman. Even the push for societal embrace of homosexuals can be cynically perceived as a way to keep people from reproducing. There is, of course, the left's naked hatred of the Catholic Church and its position on contraception, a policy intended to encourage human reproduction. However, it is the leftist cause above all else to eradicate the Judeo-Christian based society that at its core is all about family and children. This battle just may be the undoing of socialism and its anti-human agenda. The most powerful nation on earth still believes in God and it is a nation that, while losing ground around the fringes, is still solidly in favor of mankind and the perpetuation of the species.



TJ Willms said...

The continued erosion of morality is arguably one of the left’s most effective tools in its attack on humanity. It encompasses so many of their goals each of them shrouded in subterfuge but ultimately all are deadly to the human body and spirit. Most leftist extremism can trace its heritage back to the anti-war movement of the 1960’s. These “flower children” were so enamored of the experience of being anti-establishment they will continue searching to the ends of the earth for an outlet for their leftover activism. Unfortunately their choices of who requires a “champion” is always at odds with the continuation of humanity as the preeminent species on earth. As a species, we have the ultimate authority and responsibility over the environment in which we live. We do not always act with benevolence toward other species. However, when presented with incontrovertible evidence that we are causing harm we usually, if slowly correct our actions.

The dichotomy of the left’s “kill the innocent spare the guilty” stance regarding the death penalty and abortion has always amazed and confused me. I do and will always support the death penalty for the conscious act of murdering another human being.
The primary problem with it is how it is applied and carried out in our justice system.
Capital crimes must have a much higher threshold in every respect and cannot be treated as they are now with the cavalier sloppiness the legal system is allowed in cases of lesser import. Leaving a prisoner languishing on death row for 20 years only to be executed finally does in my mind reach the constitutional level of cruel and unusual punishment. Our evidentiary procedures must improve, suppressing pertinent evidence must not be tolerated and the sentences must by carried out far more expeditiously than is the current practice.

Timothy Birdnow said...

You got it right, Craig! The Left is in love with Death. They have always sought to destroy Western Civilization and Culture, and they have some deep, romantic view of a post-apocalyptic world where nature can be in harmony-Eden restored. You have eloquently shown the pathways taken by the ``culture of death`` as Pope John Paul II called it.

Yes, you are right; they are as dangerous (or more dangerous) than any terrorists!