Thursday, September 14, 2006

"BIOETHICS?"

George Orwell's "Brave New World" described in his book "1984" was not that far fetched or that far off from reality. In 2006, a mere 22 years later, we have a world thrown into religious conflict between the Judeo-Christian West and Islam, we have unwarranted wire taps in the name of national security as a result of the fruits of this conflict on 9/11/2001 that placed our Nation of laws protected by our Constitution on the "slippery slope" to totalitarianism.
We have the "trashing" of our Constitution by a judicial system infiltrated by fanatical liberals on religious and human rights. They are slowly and successfully eliminating "religious faith issues" under the guise of "separation of Church and State", rejecting that the Constitution also guarantees that the state cannot deny those issues as well. They eliminated the "right to life" of one group of citizens..."the unborn, developing citizens in the womb" in favor of the rights of another group of citizens... "the female sex" of our species, who are biologically responsible for propagation of our species since they are obviously the only ones capable of protecting the development process of our unborn citizens, hidden under the guise of a Constitutional right of privacy. This is a totally illogical position because it concludes that the rights of one group is greater than another's. The argument that a developing baby is the mother's body and therefore she has some inalienable right to terminate the child is biologically untrue. Sexual reproduction with Eutherian Development is a condition of our species and human law has no logical jurisdiction over it. Thinking that a child is "ours" is the basis of the erroneous conclusion that we have rights greater than the unborn. Mathematical statistics proves the rights of the unborn in that this unborn child is genetically unique and WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN IN ALL OF ETERNITY.

The sexual revolution, spured on by effective birth control methods such as the "pill" was said to set the stage for an eventual decline of morality and a "slippery slope" that would destroy the fabric of civilization. It sure has helped cause the decline of the Judeo-Christian moral system and the practice of the faith. SITUATION ETHICS HAS REPLACED RELIGION WITH THE "NEW RELIGION OF LIBERALISM." In addition to the "pill" we have witnessed the following movement "down the slope"......Roe vs Wade, RU-486 and the most recent addition to the arsenal of WMD's against humanity..."PLAN B".
Many would disagree with the above statements and my "pro-life" position but the following article from World Net Daily (link in title) should send "chills" down the spine of even the most staunch liberal, pro-choice person. Seems that "bioehtics" and morality is in the "eye of the beholder", sure is for Islamo-Facists who have declared all the world "INFIDEL"....................... Pax...Doubting Thomas

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51963



"Peter Singer, An internationally known Princeton "bioethicist" and animal-rights activist says he'd kill disabled babies if it were in the "best interests" of the family, because he sees no distinction in the child's life whether it is born or not, and the world already allows abortion." (WND)

THE FOLLOWING LINK IS TO A STORY FOR ALL THE DISABLED BABIES OUT THERE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED IN OUR "BEST INTERESTS."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryCTIigaloQ&mode=related&search

|

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home