Conservative political and social commentary
|Contact us: firstname.lastname@example.org|
First they came for the communists,
but I was not a communist, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the socialists
and the trade unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they
came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did not speak out. And when they
came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
– Pastor Martin Niemoeller.
You are welcome to post or publish these articles, in whole or in part, provided that you cite the author and website.
|There are 819 News Items in 819 pages and you are on page number 351|
|Captain Obama of the Titanic - Monday, July 07, 2008
Captain Obama of the Titanic
Full Speed Ahead Into the Dark Night
David C. Stolinsky, MD
We can argue about whether liberal or conservative ideas are better. We can dispute the relative merits of raising or lowering taxes. These are questions on which citizens of a republic may have legitimate differences. But there are issues on which no citizen of a free nation would be expected to differ. There are questions for which all ethical persons would be expected to have the same answer. Here is one such question:
Suppose an abortion is performed after the fetus has reached the age of viability. But suppose the baby is delivered alive and has a good chance to survive. What should the doctors and nurses do?
Virtually everyone of my generation would have only one response. We would look at you in disbelief, then reply, “What do you mean, what should the doctors and nurses do? Of course they should do their best to care for the newborn baby. If the mother still doesn’t want the baby, the child should be put up for adoption. Loving married couples are lined up, waiting for newborns to adopt − even handicapped newborns. But if the mother changes her mind, as she may after seeing the baby, she should keep the child. What a stupid question!”
To my generation, that would be a stupid question − and an immoral one. But to younger people, the question does not seem stupid, and certainly not immoral. The presumptive Democratic candidate for president, Barack Obama, answered the question clearly when he was an Illinois state senator. A bill was introduced that required medical personnel to care for babies who were born alive after abortion procedures. Obama voted “No.” That is, he voted to kill them. No doubt he will appoint Supreme Court justices who share his views on the non-sanctity and disposability of inconvenient human life.
It is one thing to be a staunch supporter of abortion, as Obama is. It is quite another to support actual infanticide. But Obama is not alone in this anti-life opinion. Another leader of the Democratic Party, Sen. Barbara Boxer, also opposed such a law, saying that children deserve legal protection “only when you bring your baby home.” And if the “mother” decides not to bring the baby home, it’s all right to kill the baby? Have they heard the expression “adoption,” or even the expression “murder”? I guess not.
Activists say that a woman should have control over her own body. Of course, if she did have control over her body, she would have avoided unwanted pregnancy in the first place − with the exception of rape. A fetus is in a woman’s body, but not part of it. A baby is a unique individual. Except for identical twins, each baby has DNA unlike anyone who ever lived or is likely to live. The baby is not “part of her body” like a decayed tooth that can be removed and discarded. But now, aborted fetuses are sometimes thrown in the trash.
But even if we agree that a woman should control “her own body,” how can this mean that she should also control what happens to the baby after the child has been delivered and is no longer in her body? Domestic and zoo animals sometimes abandon their newborns. We take these baby animals from their neglectful mothers and raise them. Yet pro-abortion activists insist that human babies have fewer rights than animals. They insist that if the mother requested an abortion, the baby must be killed even if the child is born alive and has a good chance to survive.
In my day, a politician who took that position could never be elected sewer inspector. But my day is clearly over. Obama’s “No” vote on the Don’t-Kill-the-Baby Law hasn’t hurt him politically. The liberal media, which are pro-abortion, never mention his vote. To the media, anything that seems “pro-choice” must be good, even if the “choice” is to kill a newborn baby. How indescribably sad.
Did you see the film “Titanic”? Do you recall why the ship sank? It had 16 watertight compartments, but they were open on top. Five compartments at the front of the ship were ripped open by the iceberg. The ship could have stayed afloat for hours like that, until a rescue ship arrived.
But as the water entered, the front of the ship grew heavier and sank lower. Then water spilled over the top of the fifth compartment into the sixth. As it filled, the bow sank still lower, and water began to spill into the seventh compartment, and so on. The ship sank in a short time, and 1500 people drowned.
After the ship hit the iceberg, the designer, Thomas Andrews, brought the blueprints to the captain. He explained why it was inevitable that the ship would sink, declaring, “It’s a mathematical certainty.” The captain understood, but of course it was too late.
Andrews had designed a good ship, but it wasn’t foolproof. Nothing can withstand a big enough fool. Andrews went down with the ship. This assured that his name would live in honor, but it did nothing to assure that the other 1499 victims would live at all. Only a wiser captain could have prevented their deaths. Only a captain who did not order full speed ahead on a moonless night after receiving iceberg warnings could have averted disaster. Dying with honor is good, but living with wisdom is better – and a lot less painful.
Human life is like the “Titanic.” The only barrier to the cold, dark sea is the outer hull. Once it is breached, water inexorably spills from one compartment into the next. The internal partitions are too flimsy to hold for long. If all human life isn’t sacred, none is. Who lives and who dies then becomes just a matter of opinion, and your opinion is no more valid than anyone else’s − for example, Dr. Kevorkian’s or Judge Greer’s, or for that matter Dr. Mengele’s.
The Nazis also began with unwanted children and the disabled. They used drugs, then gas. Then they went on to other “useless eaters” – Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, socialists, trade unionists, homosexuals and political dissidents. Remember what Pastor Niemoeller learned from bitter experience: If we don’t speak up, who will be left to speak up for us?
We rush to eradicate all traces of the Judeo-Christian tradition and its reverence for human life. But who’s next? The mentally ill? The autistic? The homeless? The chronically ill? The disabled? Those who live too long for Social Security? Those whose illnesses are too expensive for Medicare? Those who emit too much carbon dioxide by breathing? “Deep” ecologists want to reduce the human population drastically. When the U.S. Supreme Court declared carbon dioxide a pollutant, the road to this goal became clear − we “pollute” the air with every breath we take. Am I a paranoid alarmist? We’ll see.
Before it is too late, we should heed the warning of Thomas Andrews. Once we breach the outer hull, the internal partitions won’t hold, and eventually we will sink. It’s a mathematical certainty.
We used to know that a woman cannot “choose” to have her newborn baby killed. It’s time we remembered. Otherwise, we won’t deserve to survive the onslaught of extremist Islam. We see whole categories of human life as unfit to live. Isn’t this exactly how extremist Muslims see “infidels” like us? We dehumanize and objectify the weak. Why are we surprised when others dehumanize and objectify us? What did we expect?
What will you say if we are submerged in the rising tide of radical Islam? Or what will you say if we simply sink into a new Dark Age? You could call this karma. You could call this reaping the whirlwind. I call it the penalty for violating the Thomas Andrews Rule. But if Captain Obama assumes command, we will steam even faster into the dark, moonless night. Keep your life preserver handy − you’re likely to need it.
Dr. Stolinsky writes on political and social issues. He can be contacted at email@example.com.