Fishing, it’s a thing – a great thing and a great thing to love. Well, to the sane people among us at least; others, not so much. Great or not though, it underscores a lot of the key differences in outlook between the two primary ideologies in the US.
Archive for the 'Ethics & Morality' Category
As I’ve said before, we’ve been in a long slide into immorality and societal collapse. As I’ve also said before, this is to some extent to be expected; it’s the natural result of certain thought patterns and the normal cycle of Man.
Still, when it becomes more societally fundamental and destroying basic behavioral rules which aid in that society being civil, it’s maddening. The simple fact that Millennials have turned “speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil” on its ear speaks directly to what is wrong with today’s generation, who are horrifically the future of society.
And yeah, it’d be so easy to partially excuse them and blame it on modern technology. That, however, doesn’t make any more sense than blaming firearms for people’s violence. Sure, constant internet usage and the nature of social media make their bad behavior easier, but they’re not the cause of it. The cause of it is something that is very wrong in the hearts, minds, and souls of the Millennials.
That’s right. In my opinion the deliberate killing off of unborn-as-yet children is murder. It should, insofar as I’m concerned, be treated exactly as any other instance of such a crime – homicide, most often 1st Degree Homicide since it’s normally a premeditated act of killing on the parts of both the woman and the abortionist.
And therein is the rub as it were. Abortion is the commission of the crime of homicide and needs to be treated exactly the same in ways as any other instance of the crime.
If either the mother-to-be or the involved medical professional is of the strongly held and reasonable belief that bringing the child within her to term would be a clear and present threat to her life, then the abortion must be considered a case of justifiable homicide.
The Dead Can’t Be Killed
Rather obviously – but still a recurring point of contention apparently – if the unborn child is already dead, he or she can’t be killed and so, hence, he or she cannot be unlawfully killed, i.e., murdered. If any crime could be assessed in such circumstances it would rightly be assessed upon any who refused to remove the unborn child’s corpse from the woman’s body.
Undertaking reasonable actions that in some statistically insignificant numbers of cases could lead to the death of a viable child in utero is not murder. Hence, the use of chemical contraceptives – including the correct use of Plan B – does not fall within the scope of homicide any more than anyone driving a car, which might result in an accident which might in turn result in the death of an unborn child does so.
Withdrawal of Life Support
While potentially problematical in detail and execution, it is my opinion that ending the life of an unborn child who will not survive in any real and functional manner past their birth is not murder. It is merely the withdrawal of life support, with the mother having given informed consent for such removal.
And no; I make no exceptions in the cases of rape and/or incest. To kill the child of such unions is an attainder and quite specifically a particularly extreme form of “corruption of the blood,” wherein the child is punished for the crimes of the parent(s).
And there is my opinion, in some detail, on abortion and on abortion itself only. In this post I’m not venturing my opinions on ancillary issues and laws which surround it and which are often used as arguments in favor of killing off unborn children.
Claude-Frédéric Bastiat, a 19th Century economist and political philosopher of the French Liberal School – think proto-libertarian – was more than a little concerned about society turning its back to what is good and embracing what it is evil.
When misguided public opinion honors what is despicable and despises what is honorable, punishes virtue and rewards vice, encourages what is harmful and discourages what is useful, applauds falsehood and smothers truth under indifference or insult, a nation turns its back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe.
— Frédéric Bastiat
Economic Harmonies (1850 AD)
Not, of course that this is new thought or warning. It goes back to at least Biblical times.
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
— Isaiah 5:20, The Bible (KJV)
But, inherent to these very thoughts and proscriptions in the conundrum. Who are the misguided of the public? Who, indeed, have chosen to call evil good, and good evil? When a society – truly, at this point more of a population than a society – cannot even agree upon what words mean, much less what are examples thereof, it becomes almost moot to try to decide this. And yet, from the standpoint of both utility and primal, existential need, decide this America must do.
Motivation can matter as much as action in the longer run. Hence, a good act can be a great evil.
Now is my way clear, now is the meaning plain: Temptation shall not come in this kind again.
The last temptation is the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.
— T.S. Eliot
Murder in the Cathedral
Never in my experience has this moral and societal fact been more poignantly exemplified than by the recently reported actions of a 10 year-old girl from Thornton, CO, Tatum Gonzales. She did a deed that was ever so right, but did so for reasons that were so very wrong.
Tatum Gonzales called the whole family together on her 10th birthday but not for the reason you might think.
“Make a change to the world,” she said as she stood in her mom’s Thornton kitchen, making a turkey and cheese sandwich.
Tatum’s only wish on her 10th birthday was to help feed the homeless.
“I don’t think it’s right that all of us get to eat and they don’t,” she said. “They might be starving so I just thought of this idea for my birthday.”
Family and friends filled the kitchen, put on plastic gloves and pitched in to make 100 sack lunches. They even decorated each of the bags.
I cannot see young Ms. Gonzales act as anything other than a beautiful act of kindness and charity. There’s no doubt in my mind that she did the right thing. And yet, her own words, “I don’t think it’s right that all of us get to eat and they don’t,” show that she did it for the wrong – indeed, one of the worst – reasons imaginable.
Her belief that is not right that her and her family have their basic needs met – by her parents’ efforts and labors in all likelihood – so long as others do not enjoy these things is horrific to me – as it should be horrific to, not just every American, but every freeborn man or woman on this world. This, the belief of child that they don’t deserves and have no right to what their parents have earned, is the epitome of evils that Liberals, Progressives, and SJWs commit each and every day.
Charity, largess, munificence, beneficence – call it what you will – are great things, laudable in nigh on every case, even those which are poorly thought out and/or mis-aimed. To see it in a young child should be a thing of joy; a thing that restores some measure of hope for Man. And that is what is so evil and so horrifying about this. This is the ultimate corruption of the virtue of generosity. This is the greatest treason.
Not, of course, is this to say that this is her treason. No, she is one who has been betrayed. She has been tempted beyond her means as a young child by others, most likely the (mis)education system and the media. She is one of far too many victims of the Liberals’ and Progressives systematic abuse and corruption of our nation’s children.
Yes, of all the temptations that the devils of Socialism – these hellborn demons of “Social Justice” – try our resolve with is the greatest treason of doing what we think is right for the wrong, evil reasons.