Think about this next time some pro-choice activist tells you its all about "freedom of choice".
"That is, we need the mentally retarded to teach us how to better sacrifice our lives and divest ourselves of our self-interested ways more than they need us to care for them. At Noodlefood, Diana Hsieh condemns such a stand as "the worship of retardation." Given that Palin had complete foreknowledge of her child's severe disability yet nevertheless chose to have it, it is hard not to see her choice as anything less."
Yeah, choosing life for the Down's Syndrome child is selfish "worship of retardation".
This moron even finds time to be morally outraged.
So in the anti-abortion advocate's eyes, a parent's desire to raise healthy children by squelching unhealthy fetuses while the are still in the womb is little more than a pernicious quest, but it is not considered a pernicious quest to knowingly bring severely disabled children into this world.
Isn't eugenics anything other than a "pernicious quest"? But the funny thing is, based on what he is implying here, how is "knowingly bringing severely disabled children into this world" evil? Oh, because mentally handicapped people make you go "ewwww..."
There are few more morally bankrupt moral propositions in this world than being "pro-choice". Euphemisms make murder go down easier. After all, even the Nazis had to hide their genocide behind the term "Final Solution".
You keep affirming the morality of killing the lesser, eventually, you will find yourself at the wrong end of the knife.
No comments:
Post a Comment