Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ideas that are killing humanity - and the case for life
Mercatornet ^ | 3/23/16 | Richard Weikart

Posted on 03/23/2016 8:39:29 AM PDT by wagglebee

Zoos with humans on display; an academic who wishes publicly that 90 percent of humans would perish from ebola; suicide tourists; “after-birth abortions” – what is the world coming to? In a new book, The Death of Humanity: And the Case for Life, history professor Richard Weikart examines the intellectual currents that produce these shocking phenomena and defends the sanctity of human life. Here, Professor Weikart answers some questions from MercatorNet.

‘The Death of Humanity’ is a sombre title. Are things really that bad? What do you mean by it?

My title refers to the way that many intellectuals and scholars in our day have tried to deal a death-blow to the Judeo-Christian view that human life is valuable.  Peter Singer with his book, Unsanctifying Human Life, is a prime example, but I provide dozens of examples of secular thinkers who have promoted dehumanizing ideologies.  Some of them view humans as nothing more than machines, while others see us as nothing more than another animal produced through millions of copying errors (mutations) over eons of time.  Multitudes of educated people in our society think humans are just a cosmic accident with no value, meaning or purpose.  As I demonstrate in my book, these ideas foster attitudes inimical to life, leading to easy acceptance of abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia.  The demise of the idea of humanity thus leads to the death of real individuals, who are being killed, often by physicians.

Your subtitle is The Case for Life – again, is it necessary to make a case for something as inevitable as life itself?

The “case for life” is more specifically the case for human life, and yes, it is necessary, because many in our day are arguing that human life has no special value.  Interestingly, one of the ways I build my “case for life” is by showing that even many of those who deny that humans have any intrinsic value nonetheless recognize that human life is valuable. For example, the University of Chicago evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne has stated,

“Although it’s seen by nearly everyone as humane—and even moral—to end the life of our terminally ill pets, it’s regarded as murder to make the same decision for ourselves.” 

He scoffs at the idea that humans are qualitatively different from, or have greater value than, animals.  However, if you read more of Coyne, you find that he embraces many moral stances typical of many American progressives. He would be horrified if I suggested that we round up all the homeless people in a city, sterilize them, imprison them until someone comes to take them home with them, and if no one comes for them, euthanize them.  Yet this is how we treat stray dogs.  Coyne and other intellectuals need to understand that their philosophies lead to untenable conclusions, which should lead them to question and then jettison their false presuppositions.

What does the term “sanctity of life” mean? Is it meaningful outside of the Judaeo-Christian tradition?

Every society understands the “sanctity of life” at some level, because all societies forbid murder.  However, unfortunately, many societies restrict the moral community, leaving some people vulnerable to depredation, oppression, and even death.  In some societies membership in the moral community has been restricted by race.  In our society many prominent bioethicists are urging us to define unborn children or people with some kinds of disabilities as “non-persons.”  The Judeo-Christian tradition has promoted the sanctity of life, to be sure, but other religions and philosophies have stood up for the equal value of humans, too.

Secularists might object that the slaughter and divine punishments recorded in the Old Testament, and the wars and oppression marking the history of Christianity, suggest anything but the sacredness of human life. What has the tradition to show compared with so much bloodshed?

I find it ironic that secularists, who often deny that any objective morality exists, get so moralistic when confronting Christianity.  They apparently understand—contra their own worldview—that killing and oppression are objectively wrong! 

The atheist Richard Dawkins was once being asked about his own moral relativism, and Dawkins asked,

“What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right?  I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question.” 

But, while (amazingly) Dawkins finds it difficult to condemn Hitler for his atrocities, he has no problem continually blasting Christianity (and other religions) for being immoral.

Having said that, let me confront the question more directly.  While secularists have no moral fulcrum to condemn anything as immoral, Christianity does have the moral resources to condemn injustices, even if they are performed in the name of Christianity!  Indeed, Jesus warned that false prophets would come in his name and deceive many people (Matt. 7:15-23; 24:23-24), and the apostle Peter prophesied that many people in the churches would follow false teachers, “because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed.” (II Pet. 2:2)  Thus Christianity from its very inception recognized that not everything done in the name of Christianity would be moral, but rather every action would have to be judged on the basis of God’s eternal standards.

As Christians, we need to acknowledge and condemn past abuses committed by anyone, whether they called themselves Christians or not.  At the same time, we need to excel in good works, as many Christians throughout the ages have done, by helping the poor, the weak, the disabled, the elderly, little children, and the needy.

We assume that people still ask themselves questions about the meaning and purpose of life, but do they? What answers are being proposed – in the West, anyway – other than creation by a loving God who wills our eternal happiness?

Many of the intellectuals I discuss in my book directly deny that there is any meaning and purpose in life.  But, while they may suppress this question, I wonder how many evade it completely.  Let me give a poignant example to illustrate this—one that I was surprised to discover while researching this book.  Bertrand Russell, one of the most influential atheistic philosophers of the twentieth century, publicly taught that life was meaningless.  However, in 1916 he wrote in private correspondence:

“The centre of me is always and eternally a terrible pain—a curious wild pain—a searching for something beyond what the world contains, something transfigured and infinite—the beatific vision—God—I do not find it, I do not think it is to be found—but the love of it is my life—it’s like passionate love for a ghost.” 

This is a startling admission and shows that Russell at some level recognized that his worldview was inadequate.

The answer that seems to be the most frequent among the secular philosophers I examine is that we simply give meaning and purpose to our own lives.  However, I’m not sure how satisfying this answer is, because it implies that the meaning they give to their lives is illusory.

The idea that we are just products of evolution, “and that’s OK”, misses the fact that humans took over from evolution some time ago and that scientists are making a bid to shape our destinies. Do you agree?

I certainly agree that scientists are trying to shape our destinies and guide evolution.  Not only do I examine the eugenics movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century in my book—and C. S. Lewis’s and George Orwell’s critiques of it—but my book also discusses the transhumanist movement, which today is trying to take the reins of evolution.  There is a tension here—implied by your question—between simply accepting nature as it is, and trying to “improve” on nature.  Ironically, the idea that we can “improve” on evolution and promote evolutionary progress implies that there is some higher goal, but this is fundamentally in conflict with a naturalistic worldview, in which there are no intrinsic goals or purposes to the process.

An important part of your book concerns the evolution of ideas that have led to today’s assaults on the sanctity of life. What, for example, explains the power of the abortion rights movement in the world today?

As secularization has increased in intellectual circles in the Western world, many have adopted the view that pleasure—including sexual pleasure—is the highest goal of life.  One of the chapters of my book is on “The Love of Pleasure,” where I discuss (among other ideas) the rise of utilitarian philosophy, which teaches that the greatest pleasure for the greatest number is the measure of morality.  I show that many thinkers have reduced humans to pleasure-seeking machines.

It is no coincidence that laws permitting abortion in many European countries, and Roe v. Wade in the US, came on the heels of the Sexual Revolution.  Abortion on demand is a way to protect and promote indulgence in sexual immorality.

As well as reading your book, should we read more history? 

How could I, as a historian, say no?  If we are going to comprehend the moral quagmire we are in today, it helps to understand the history behind it.  However, my book is more than just history.  It not only explains, but also critiques many philosophies and ideologies that are still prominent today. 

Despite the title, the purpose of my book is not to spread doom and gloom, but rather to call us to confront the problems that I raise.  We need to do more than just wring our hands and complain about our society.  We can change this world, if we will courageously, but humbly, speak the truth in love.

Richard Weikart is professor of history at California State University, Stanislaus, and author of The Death of Humanity: And the Case for Life.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: moralabsolutes; prolife; secularism
As secularization has increased in intellectual circles in the Western world, many have adopted the view that pleasure—including sexual pleasure—is the highest goal of life. One of the chapters of my book is on “The Love of Pleasure,” where I discuss (among other ideas) the rise of utilitarian philosophy, which teaches that the greatest pleasure for the greatest number is the measure of morality. I show that many thinkers have reduced humans to pleasure-seeking machines.

This sums up the problem perfectly.

1 posted on 03/23/2016 8:39:29 AM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; AKA Elena; APatientMan; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


2 posted on 03/23/2016 8:40:08 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Could we just step back several decades to an America where a leading AME Bishop, who also happened to be an Ohio State Legislator, was invited to deliver the Address at a 100th Anniversary Celebration of our nation's Declaration of Independence. The following is a small excerpt from Bishop Benjamin Arnett's lengthy tracing of world and U. S. history
"Withdraw from Christendom the Bible, the Church with its sacraments and ministry, and Christian morality and hopes, and aspirations for time and eternity; repeal all the laws that are founded in the Christian Scriptures; remove the Christian humanities in the form of hospitals and asylums, and reformatories and institutions of mercy utterly unknown to unchristian countries; destroy the literature, the culture, the institutions of learning, the art, the refinement, the place of woman in her home and in society, which owe their origin and power to Christianity; blot out all faith in Divine Providence, love, and righteousness; turn back every believer in Christ to his former state; remove all thought or hope of the forgiveness of sins by a just but gracious God; erase the name of Christ from every register it sanctifies—in a word annihilate all the legitimate and logical effects of Christianity in Christendom—just accomplish in fact what multitudes of gifted and learned minds are wishing and trying to accomplish by their science, philosophy, and criticism, and what multitudes of the common people desire and seek, and not only would all progress toward and unto perfection cease, but not one of the shining lights of infidelity would shine much longer. Yes, the bitterest enemies of this holy and blessed religion, owe their ability to be enemies to its sacred revelations - to the inspiration and sublimity of that faith which reflects its glories on their hostile natures. They live in the strength of that which they would destroy. They are raised to their seats of opportunity and power by the grace of Him they would crucify afresh; and is it to be thought that they are stronger than that which gives them strength? Can it be supposed that a religion which civilizes and subdues, and elevates and blesses will succumb to the enmities it may arouse and quicken in its onward march? Are we to tremble for the ark of God when God is its upholder, and protector, and preserver?” - Dr. Benjaming W. Arnett, St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Urbana, Ohio, Centennial Thanksgiving Sermon, November 1876. Arnett's "Sermon" is available in the "Library of Congress - Historical Collections" - "African-American Pamphlets from the Daniel A. P. Murray Collection," 1820-1920; American Memory, Washington, DC.
Finally, in yet another section of that Sermon, Dr. Arnett warned of a movement then under way among what we would call "academics" which, if successful, would destroy the nation. Below is a relatively small excerpt from that Sermon's conclusion. In it, Rev. Arnett warned about a movement among "liberals" to remove the ideas underlying America's founding documents. See if you don't recognize those ideas in what you have observed in recent years:

"The Danger to our Country.

"Now that our national glory and grandeur is principally derived from the position the fathers took on the great questions of right and wrong, and the career of this nation has been unparalleled in the history of the past, now there are those who are demanding the tearing down the strength of our national fabric. They may not intend to tear it down, but just as sure as they have their way, just that sure will they undermine our superstructure and cause the greatest calamity of the age. What are the demands of this party of men? Just look at it and examine it for yourselves, and see if you are willing that they shall have their way; or will you still assist in keeping the ship of state in the hands of the same crew and run her by the old gospel chart! But ye men who think there is no danger listen to the demands of the Liberals as they choose to call themselves:

"'Organize! Liberals of America! The hour for action has arrived. The cause of freedom calls upon us to combine our strength, our zeal, our efforts. These are The Demands of Liberalism:

"'1. We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no longer be exempt from just taxation.

"'2. We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in State Legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other institutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued.

"'3. We demand that all public appropriations for sectarian educational and charitable institutions shall cease.

"'4. We demand that all religious services now sustained by the government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the public schools, whether ostensibly as a text-book or avowedly as a book of religious worship, shall be prohibited.

"'5. We demand that the appointment, by the President of the United States or by the Governors of the various States, of all religious festivals and fasts shall wholly cease.

"'6. We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other departments of the government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.

"'7. We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.

"'8. We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of “Christian” morality shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.

"'9. We demand that not only in the Constitution of the United States and of the several States, but also in the practical administration of the same, no privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made.'

"'Let us boldly and with high purpose meet the duty of the hour.'

"Now we must not think that we have nothing to do in this great work," Bishop/Legislator Arnett said, "for the men who are at the head of this movement are men of culture and intelligence, and many of them are men of influence. They are led by that thinker and scholar, F. E. Abbott, than whom I know but few men who has a smoother pen, or who is his equal on the battle-field of thought."

"He acknowledges that this is a religious nation and wants all men to assist him in eliminating the grand old granite principles from the framework of our national union. Will you do it freeman; will we sell the temple reared at the cost of so much precious blood and treasure? These men would have us turn back the hands on the clock of our national progress, and stay the shadow on the dial plate of our christian civilization; they would have us call a retreat to the soldiers in the army of Christ; the banner of the cross they would have us haul down, and reverse the engines of war against sin and crime; the songs of Zion they would turn into discord, and for the harmony and the melody of the sons of God, they would give us general confusion; they would have us chain the forces of virtue and unloose the elements of vice; they would have the nation loose its moorings from the Lord of truth and experience and commit interest, morally, socially; religiously and politically to the unsafe and unreliable human reason; they would discharge God and his crew and run the ship of State by the light of reason, which has always been but a dim taper in the world, and all the foot-prints it has left are marked with the blood of men, women and children. No nation is safe when left alone with reason.

"But we have no notion of giving up the contest without a struggle or a battle. We are aware that there is a great commotion in the world of thought. Religion and science are at arms length contending with all their forces for the mastery. Faith and unbelief are fighting their old battles over again, everything that can be shaken is shaking. The foundations of belief are assaulted by the army of science and men are changing their opinions. New and starting theories are promulgated to the world; old truths are putting on new garbs. Error is dressing in the latest style, wrong is secured by the unholy alliances, changes in men and things, revolution in church and state, Empires are crumbling, Kingdoms tottering; everywhere the change is seen. In the social circle, in the school house, in the pulpit and in the pews. But amid all the changes and revolutions there are some things that are unchangeable, unmovable and enduring. The forces that underline the vital power of Christianity are the same yesterday, to-day, to-morrow and forever more. They are like their God, who is omnipotent, immovable and eternal, and everywhere truth has marched it has left its moccasin tracks.

"The Conclusion of the Whole Matter.We have patiently tried to examine the record of the nations of antiquity and learn the cause of their decay and decline, their fall, why their early death; and why so many implements of destruction around and about their tombs, and everywhere, in the silent streets, mouldering ruins, tottering columns, mouldy and moist rooms, and the united voice from the sepulcher of the dead past is, "sin is a reproach to any people." We see it written on the tombs of the Kings, and engraven on the pages of time, "sin is a reproach to any people." These are the principles of governments, Right and wrong; and the people who are the advocates of Right have bound themselves together and by their united effort they have brought light out of darkness and forced strength out of weakness.

"We as a nation have a grand and glorious future before us. The sun of our nation is just arising above the horizon and is now sending his golden rays of peace from one end of the land to the other. The utmost extremities of the members of the body politic are warm and in motion by the commercial and financial activities of the land. Her face is destined to blush with beauty when peace and justice shall be enthroned. The grand march of progress shall mark her in her onward advancement in moral strength, intellectual brilliancy, and political power. Then we can say that we give to every man, woman and child the benefit of our free institutions, giving all the benefits of our common school and the freedom to worship God under their own vine and fig tree. Then will we see written, on the banner of our free, redeemed and disenthralled country, the sublime words written, not in the blood of men, but in the sun-light of truth, that "Righteousness exalteth a nation." It will fall like the morning dew on the lowly; it will descend like the showers of May on the poor; and like the sun it will shine on the good and bad, dispensing from the hand of plenty the blessings of a government founded on the principle of justice and equality.

"Standing on the threshold of the second century of the nation's life, with the experience of the past lying at our feet, we are saluted by the shout of triumph from the millions who left their homes and business and attended the Great Exposition of the skill and genius of the world, collected at Philadelphia. We were permitted to receive the greetings from the oldest to the youngest nation of the earth. Egypt and the United States clasped hands over the waste of 5,000 years, and lay their treasures at the feet of our civilization. The material, intellectual and mechanical deterioration of the one, and the unprecedented progress of the other, stand in great contrast; in all that makes the nation great,—morally, religiously and socially, the young nation is ahead.

"Following the tracks of righteousness throughout the centuries and along the way of nations, we are prepared to recommend it to all and assert without a shadow of doubt, that "Righteousness exalted a nation"; but on the other hand following the foot-prints of sin amid the ruins of Empires and remains of cities, we will say that "sin is a reproach to any people." But we call on all American citizens to love their country, and look not on the sins of the past, but arming ourselves for the conflict of the future, girding ourselves in the habiliments of Righteousness, march forth with the courage of a Numidian lion and with the confidence of a Roman Gladiator, and meet the demands of the age, and satisfy the duties of the hour. Let us be encouraged in our work, for we have found the moccasin track of Righteousness all along the shore of the stream of life, constantly advancing, holding humanity with a firm hand. We have seen it “through” all the confusion of rising and falling States, of battle, siege and slaughter, of victory and defeat; through the varying fortunes and ultimate extinctions of Monarchies, Republics and Empires; through barbaric irruption and desolation, feudal isolation, spiritual supremacy, the heroic rush and conflict of the Cross and Crescent; amid the busy hum of industry, through the marts of trade and behind the gliding keels of commerce.”

"And in America, the battle-field of modern thought, we can trace the foot-prints of the one and the tracks of the other. So let us use all of our available forces, and especially our young men, and throw them into the conflict of the Right against the Wrong.

"Then let the grand Centennial Thanksgiving song be heard and sung in every house of God; and in every home may thanksgiving sounds be heard, for our race has been emancipated, enfranchised and are now educating, and have the gospel preached to them!

"Sons of freedom, sing the glad hymns of praise on the Western plains! Daughters of sorrow shout the joyful tidings amid the savannahs of the South-land! Proclaim it on the Atlantic's western stand and declare it on the slopes of the Pacific! Humble followers of the Son of Mary, chant the eternal truth in the temple of the Most High, that “Righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.”

"We invite every nation, kindred, tongue and people, to come to our land. Come from the bogs of Ireland; come from the dykes of Holland; come from the mountains of Switzerland; and from the sunny plains of Italy; and enjoy a government made for man! Come from the jungles of Africa or Egypt, the university of the infant world; come from Asia the cradle of humanity; come and bring your gifts from the Islands of the South Sea and spice land! Come ye men of every clime and race and see a nation founded in Righteousness, guarded by Justice, and supported by truth and equity, and defended by God!

"When thus united in one grand commonwealth of nationalities the universal prayer will be:

"Show us our Aaron, with his rod of flower!
Our Miriam, with her timbrel soul in tune!
And call some Joshua, in spirits power,
To praise our sun of strength at point of noon.
God of our fathers! over sand and sea,
Still keep our struggling footsteps close to thee." - (End of Excerpt from "Righteousness Exalteth a Nation, but Sin is a Reproach to Any People")

3 posted on 03/23/2016 8:48:18 AM PDT by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Most academics and intellectuals of today appear to be suffering from one form or another of mental disease or defect.


4 posted on 03/23/2016 9:11:28 AM PDT by JimRed (Is it 1776 yet? TERM LIMITS, now and forever! Build the Wall, NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

From a secularist point of view, isn’t it academics and intellectuals who would be most inclined toward abortion and suicide to solve the “humanity” problem. Isn’t this a sort of Darwinian solution to the problem?


5 posted on 03/23/2016 2:04:22 PM PDT by R Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson