“[I]f killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.”
That quote was taken from the paper in this story from BioEdge. If you have ever wondered how the German people allowed the holocaust to happen, this is how it started. When their government and social institutions started to argue that certain people were not human and, therefore, it was not wrong to kill them, the German people did not object. And, once you start down the slippery slope of “rationalizing” who is and is not “deserving of life,” you will find a way to justify the taking of any life that causes you some inconvenience. In fact, if you will bother to do your own homework, you will find there is a connection between the abortion movement in this nation and the eugenics movement from the early 20th Century. Why does that matter? It matters because the Germans claimed the American eugenics movement as the foundation for their killing of “undesirables.”
The attitude of justification in this story is growing more and more prevalent in Western society, as reflected in this video:
It is also the motivation behind “The Whole Lives System:” the system behind Obamacare. It was designed by Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of Rom Emanuel. The idea here is that, in an environment such as ours where services are assumed to be fixed and finite, those services need to be rationed according to the individual’s worth to society. This necessarily means that the young should receive less care as society has not invested that mush in them in terms of education and other assets and resources, and because they have very little value to society in return. The same rational goes for the elderly: those who are deemed to be past their useful contribution to society would receive less care as a result. And those who are deemed to be nothing but a cost to society with no prospect of providing a return would not be worth the expenditure of any medical care resources. Again, do some research into this and you will find that this is the rationale behind the system the government is building for us (but not for them as they will always be worth more than the cost to care for them as they are the intellectual elite and society needs them to function).
Please, do not dismiss this issue. Nor should you dismiss the notion that human life is equivalent to plants. If the connection of human life to the Creator is severed, then the argument in this paper is logically sound, valid and rational. This is what I was talking about in my past posts when I explained why morality can only exist if it is founded on the Creator. What this paper reflects is an example of my past illustrations of how reasoning typical of people like John Stewart Mill can and does rationalize anything a person desires – if right/wrong is first divorced from God.
(I have no control over what you believe, but I will tell you that I understand the real enemy here is not the left or the right, nor any one individual. The force we are really fighting here is an ancient evil, and unless we understand, accept and face it, we will not defeat it, we will only enable it further. I am not trying to preach. I am not trying to claim superior intelligence or insight. I am posting this from a position of nothing. Utah and most of the rest of you are far more accomplished than I. The only thing I have is time, and I use it to think. I offer this only as a humble attempt to help you save your time by making you aware of something that you might have missed or haven’t given much thought, and then try to be of service to you by offering a start on what I see as the issue(s) at hand. I hope it is of some use to you in your life.)