Release The Hounds!

Welcome to the Archives of Release the Hounds! Please visit the new site--and the radio show--at Don't forget to update your bookmarks!

Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Grotesqueries of Modern Secular Liberalism-Our Own Culture of Death

Do you remember Dr. Peter Singer of Princeton University? If you don't, let me take a moment to refresh your memory. He is the bio-ethics professor from Australia who advocates, among other things, infanticide and equal rights for animals and humans. In his own words from 1998: "'Parents may with good reason regret that a disabled child was ever born,' he explains. In these cases he states that 'the effect that the death of a child will have on its parents can be a reason for, rather than against, killing it.'" "Professor Singer, however, does not discriminate against the disabled alone. 'Beings who cannot see themselves as entities with a future cannot have any preferences about their own future existence,' theorizes Singer. Therefore, his argument follows, because even a healthy infant cannot reason its own self-existence, the right to kill it is justified. " It gets worse: "Singer goes on to speculate that those who continue to eat animal flesh produced by farmers, are no better than white, Southern slave owners. A major reason why "speciesism" is a great concern for the professor is that "Sometimes animals may suffer more because of their more limited understanding." "Singer's orthodoxy of relativism knows no bounds. 'No objective assessment,' reveals the incoming Princeton professor, 'can support the view that it is always worse to kill members of our species who are not persons than members of other species who are.' This idea is based on the premise that "some non-human animals are persons" and some humans are not persons." He also has no problem with necrophilia or conceiving and giving birth to children in order to harvest their body parts. Why do I bring this up? Fast-forward to the Netherlands yesterday where it was learned that doctors at an Amsterdam hospital had conducted "mercy killings" of newborns. The Health Ministry is being urged to create an independent board to review euthanasia cases for terminally ill people "with no free will" including children. This is all very grotesque but all very expected when we exchange the sanctity of life for the quality of life as our standard. The idea that there should be no suffering or hardship, and therefore all efforts to remove it are acceptable, is an inevitable byproduct of secular humanism. An existence without suffering or strife is an impoverished one. There can be redemption through suffering and, in fact, it may be necessary.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home