Evil in Our Time, Volume II

Abortion & Population Control (continued)
These days hardly anyone sane gives any credence whatsoever to the “population bomb” hysteria that we endured in the dark decades of the ‘60s and ‘70s. Mass starvation and $100/barrel oil, predictions of the lunatic left fringe, have failed to materialize, despite the population growth of China & India. Global economic progress and the wonders of genetically modified crop technology (both due in large part to the Reagan Conservative Revolution) have terminated these as even remote threats (more on oil prices in a future post in this series). From an intellectual standpoint, the Malthusian limits to growth menace are simply dead. These facts notwithstanding, in addition to championing the idea of abortion-on-demand, the evil Clinton administration allocated almost $300 million a year to international population control – or what is euphemistically described as "family planning." From Brazil to Nigeria, from India to Mexico, couples’ basic human right to control their fertility has been steamrolled by the state, thanks in large part to the of tainted dollars & false limits-to-growth propaganda of the Clinton Administration and their fringe feminist friends.

The United Nations has been complicit in some of the most inhumane forms of population control through the United Nations Population Fund. The UNFPA gave an award to the Chinese government for the effectiveness of its genocidal one child per couple policy. Nobody really knows how many victims there are, but the murder of countless millions of innocent girls (the cultural preference is for boys) is horrendous. It is estimated that at least 10 million babies, almost 90% girls, were murdered at the hands of Chinese population control fanatics (assuming it has ceased). This atrocity will go down in history as one of the greatest abuses of human rights in the 20th century. Infanticide on such a scale has only been exceeded by number of American babies viciously murdered prior to birth since Roe v. Wade. In terms of human casualties of atrocities, only Mao's Great Leap Forward, Stalin's Extermination of Jews, and Roe v. Wade exceed this horror in terms of the massive destruction of life. Sadly, the United Nations continues to spend tens of millions each year on "population control."

These barbaric programs sterilize women against their will, and yet the so-called feminists are silent. How in the world can supporters of programs that sterilize women against their will be called pro-choice? In 1998, the U.S. Senate Committee on Human Rights heard from witnesses of the China population program relate how rural women are forcibly strapped to steel tables in "hospitals" and their babies aborted -- often during the last days of pregnancy. Pro-choice? I think not. There are quite literally millions of mothers in Asia, Africa, and Latin America who would vehemently disagree.

Now that the subject of population control has been breached, let’s note how liberals really feel about humanitarian issues: Nobel winner supported biological warfare as form of population control

Top-secret files recently declassified from the National Archives of Australia...has revealed that one of the fathers of modern biotechnology and genetic engineering advocated using biological weapons against Indonesia and other "overpopulated" countries of South-East Asia...world-famous microbiologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet recommended...in 1947 that biological and chemical weapons should be developed to target food crops and spread infectious diseases...Macfarlane...advised..."Introduction of yellow fever into a country with appropriate mosquito vectors might build up into a disabling epidemic before control measures were established..."

The article then goes on to document what the "moderate Republican" Secretary of State and Nobel Peace Prize winner (AKA raging liberal), Henry Kissinger and the U.S. National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), which he authored, proposed: population control.

The report spelled out a plan to bring about "a two-child family on the average" throughout the world "by about the year 2000." Interestingly, NSSM 200 went into detail about avoiding U.S. responsibility for population-control programs by ensuring that the UN and international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank adopt population-control policies as prerequisites to their giving of aid. The report suggested furthering the camouflage by mandating that countries accepting aid from the UN or the banks form their own population-control ministries.

No conservative would ever approve of or condone such disgusting anti-life policies.

Additionally, reflect on the following: There has been no increase in the global annual childbirth total for nearly two decades. If current trends continue, Earth's population will level off at 8 billion people by about 2050. Global population is expected to fall to about 3.5 billion people by 2150. How much longer would it then continue to decline? Can you imagine what kind of global economic depression we would then enter as economic growth rates begin to slip into the negative? One would imagine that tens of trillions of dollars of equity and real estate value would melt away like dew in the morning sun worldwide, and that standards of living that were once indefinitely sustainable would become impossible to sustain. Sorry about that…I suppose I got a bit off topic. :) More to come next week.

Politics News News and politics Current Affairs Culture Blog Opinion thoughts

Evil in Our Time, Volume I

First of all, let me begin by outlining the thesis of my argument. As we all know, American Liberals have allied themselves to the causes of totalitarianism, communism, fascism, despotism, terrorism, and genocide. Many people might think that this is a bit strong, that I shouldn't go there, but I believe in standing up for truth, and the last few years since I have gradually moved from being a moderate Independent to a Conservative Republican (beginning in the year 1999, and sealing my choice with my registration five years later as a first-time Republican preceding the 2004 Republican primaries), I have noted that the Lefties (almost all of them Democrats) have consistently chosen evil. And while many liberals have good intentions, as we all know, the road to hell is paved with them. Deceived do-gooders have perpetrated the vast majority of evil acts in our world. Nobody wants to think of themselves as evil.

Think about it:

Liberals choose death over life for everyone except those who would cause more death and suffering. Saddam Hussein? Stalin? Mao? Castro? Abortionists? Check, check, check, check, check, and check. They are great leaders who can do no wrong, according to liberals here in America. None of them deserves to die. Heck, they all deserve to be in power. No mass murderer/rapist/child molester/traitor/genocidal dictator should get the death penalty, but what of innocent infants, small, helpless unborn babies who haven't been fortunate enough to have been born? They're targeted for annihilation. Infanticide. Terri Schiavo? Kill her. President Bush? They wish to assassinate him. The American Left is consumed with hatred and disdain for life.

Every single time, American Liberals choose death, misery, and oppression instead of liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. Let me explain by touching on some “controversial” issues, in alphabetical order:

Abortion & Population Control

As every good liberal knows, at least, deep down in their heart of hearts, the shedding of innocent infant blood for the purpose of avoiding the cost and responsibilities which result from becoming a parent (IOW, the premeditated murder of helpless, innocent little babies for selfish reasons) is called Abortion. But Liberals wouldn’t countenance calling it by its true name, eschewing descriptive terminology, since that would make them look bad (Evil). Even abortion and pregnancy termination, while clinical sounding, aren’t warm and fuzzy. So they have come up with euphemisms such as “a woman’s right to choose” and “Pro-Choice.” They leave out the part about the choices including premeditated murder of a little baby that is completely dependent upon the merciless mother. In online debates with liberals, I have learned that their self-denial is so disciplined that they insist upon calling an unborn baby a fetus (fœtus in the UK) or a blob of tissue, and often other (unprintable) pejoratives which often include the adjectives “blood-sucking” and “parasitic.”

According to Liberals, abortion isn’t actually the premeditated murder of helpless human infants. Leftists prefer to refer to it as the removal of a parasitic blob of tissue. Sure (for the sake of simplicity let’s refer to the baby as a she) she can suck her thumb, she can grasp with her hands, her heart beats, and she metabolizes oxygen & glucose into carbon dioxide and other human waste. She has unique DNA just like every other human on the planet, she reacts to light and noise, and she even hiccups and opens & closes her eyes. A brain scan shows the same electrical activity in her little brain as she exhibits after birth, she kicks like crazy in the womb, and she can even recognize her father’s (assuming he isn’t a deadbeat) voice (and to a lesser extent, her mother’s). She looks and acts human, but according to liberals, she’s just a parasite to be exterminated if her mother doesn’t feel like being responsible for her actions. Now here’s the interesting thing. Liberals believe that if the mother wishes to keep her baby, the moment the infant draws her first breath, she magically becomes human, where mere seconds prior to birth, she’s just a parasitic blob of tissue. Liberals’ suspension of logic & rational thought is truly amazing. They really seem to believe that unborn infants transform into “full-fledged” humans in an instant. That, my friends, is self-deception of the highest order. Abortion is unquestionably (by the sane) evil in our time.

WRT Constitutional “debate” over abortion, let’s be clear: The United States Constitution does not guarantee a woman the “right” to choose the premeditated murder of her unborn baby. There is no “right to choose” premeditated murder of infants in the Constitution. Only a bitterly partisan ideologue and/or a deceived fool would ever argue otherwise. Ann Coulter, the esteemed Constitutional Attorney and (thankfully) conservative pundit extraordinaire, has correctly observed that the “preposterous fiction that the Constitution says anything at all about abortion” only comes about as a result of “hallucinating when reading the Constitution.”

In the interest of publishing part rather than nothing at this time, I’ll break for the time being and publish what I have written thus far. I will add to this post next week.

Politics News News and politics Current Affairs Culture Blog Opinion thoughts