Posted on 12/02/2005 6:21:53 PM PST by nickcarraway
PRINCETON, December 2, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Infamous advocate of infanticide and the man often credited as the founder of the modern radical animal rights movement, Dr. Peter Singer, was featured in the National Post this week predicting that the traditional ethics of western civilization would shortly be abolished. Singer’s comments appeared first in the September/October edition of the journal Foreign Policy as a speculation on what cherished social institutions would still exist in 35 years.
Singer, a strict utilitarian and the man the New York Times called the “greatest living philosopher,” says, “By 2040, it may be that only a rump of hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalists will defend the view that every human life, from conception to death, is sacrosanct.”
The title, “The Sanctity of Life,” can only be meant as ironic coming from a man who has made his fame advocating abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, infanticide up to thirty days after birth and euthanasia for the elderly and infirm.
Singer’s predictions, shocking as they may appear, are well on the way to fruition, however. With the advance of utilitarian philosophy at both ends of human life, first with abortion, then with cloning, IVF, and growing rates of infanticide, and then with the acceptance of euthanasia, Singer has merely given an approving nod to what is verifiably happening all over the world.
He predicts bluntly, “During the next 35 years, the traditional view of the sanctity of human life will collapse under pressure from scientific, technological, and demographic developments.”
What Singer refuses to acknowledge is that there is no unavoidable necessity for this collapse. In fact most of it is being forced on nations by activist judges, undemocratic government and other organization actions and ruthless elites, who have constantly distorted facts to suit their agendas.
Technology has been developing since the emergence of organized human culture. In all that time, however, it is not until our own epoch that the suicidal anti-human philosophy has been so broadly accepted. In no other time before the modern age, has it been seriously proposed that the development of technology must necessarily supercede the inherent value of human life.
Ironically, as the implementation of Singer’s philosophical imperatives of drastic population reduction, mass euthanasia programmes, abortion and infanticide advance, the logical outcome will be that only those “know-nothing religious fundamentalists” he excoriates will survive the anti-human pogroms.
Read the full article: http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/200509--.htm
And Mr. Singer, what is the worth of your life? What proof can you supply that your life is worth more than that of a hard-core, know-nothing religious fundamentalist? How dare this crummy hateful peice of $hit intellectualize human infanticide while demanding rights for creatures suitable only for food.
What a waste of a brain.
This is exactly what my thought was when this article first came out. Abortion alone has already impacted our political demographics in ways that do not benefit the left.
Here is a somewhat controversial article that I think has some insight into the matter. It at least shows why Singer and his ilk are wrong.
Baby Gap: How Birthrates Color the Electoral Map
Don't let the eccentric aspects of the author get you in the first few paragraphs.
The gist is that the libs are losing ground at least in part because the fertility rate is higher in red counties than it is in blue counties.
Funny... I thought that this type of thought, the idea that "inferior" human life is totally disposable for the greater good, had its last breath in 1944. But it looks like it's running strong in the American Left.
He gets off while looking at pictures of the Rwandan Genocide and Hitler Death Camps.
He's already wrong. I don't value HIS life NOW.
As a result, I predict that by 2040, a Princeton diploma will not be worth the paper that it is printed on. And I further predict that my prediction is more likely to come true than his. Wadda y'all think?
Congressman Billybob
"If Singer is right....."
Add the standard 72 Virgins, mate, and I will clamor to join you !!
Deal?
Baptist Ping
Is a Princeton diploma worth something besides toilet paper now? I think you give it too much time.
Oh, he forgot to mention that these theories don't apply to his life or that of his liberal, Ivy league collegues. Since they are so much better and wiser, their lives are still very much sacrosanct. Nothing to see here folks, move on.
Princeton, believe it or not, has at least one insightful Christian philosopher on the same faculty: Robert George. Google him combined with Princeton and you'll be left to wonder how he can manage to walk the same campus as Singer. Having said that, perhaps he's the leaven, the salt, the mustard seed...
Quite the contrary, at least according to my earlier post here (I believe it is Number 22). At least in the United States, the facts point in the opposite direction.
Some people are for whatever will keep folks from having to pay social security to all us baby boomers until we're 120.
Good ideas never go away.
Using their own logic what have they produced with the labors of their bodies that would sustain or benefit the physical well being of another human being or themselves for that matter. If the are utilitarian for what are they utilized other than producing green house gasses?
Fortunately for his mother, he's a good son.
Unfortunately for the rest of humanity, he's a pig.
Larry Flynt and his chicken sure did!
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.