The Pro-Death Movement
By Jim Goad
I once read that all societies throughout history were consistent in that they deemed it wrong to kill another human being…but they were wildly inconsistent in how they defined the term “human being.”
Such universal contradictions are compounded by the monotheism under which much of the world’s minds have been yoked for millennia, a strange philosophy that posits a God who says “Thou shalt not kill” yet who kills every creature he creates.
We currently have a culturally dominant and largely atheistic left, who never shut the fuck up about how many people have been killed by religion, Nazis, racists, and guns. Yet they’ll try to shout you into silence if you mention how many people that atheistic communistic egalitarians have killed.
And they don’t dare mention how many people that abortionists have killed, because to them, “personhood” begins at birth rather than conception.
They never tire of trotting out 70-year-old Holocaust pics and century-old lynching pics. Yet through semantic sleight-of-brain, they’ll insist that modern abortion pics are “sensationalistic.”
And I’ve marveled for years at how they openly gloat at the death—either through demographic erosion or straight-up murder—of those with whom they disagree. Apparently Woody Guthrie felt no twinge of conscience about scrawling THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS on his guitar, because to him, fascists were somehow less than human.
That’s because fascists killed people. Therefore, it’s OK to kill fascists.
Are you following that logic? If so, that makes one of us.
Rare is the individual who doesn’t condone, either actively or by inaction, the killing of others. In one way or another, almost everyone on Earth belongs to the Pro-Death Movement. Those who don’t are either masochistic or naïve. Even the misguided policies of super-pacifists will lead to overpopulation and an inevitable natural mass culling of the Earth Herd.
The same media progbots who pooped their diapers at the murder of children in Sandy Hook last November are pooh-poohing the idea that one would dare draw parallels to the case of abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell, currently on trial for murder as the result of alleged misdeeds performed at his grisly West Philadelphia “House of Horrors.”
http://youtu.be/J7YmrsY4KSY
The grand jury report on Gosnell’s Women’s Medical Center is some of the most gruesome “gore porn” you’ll ever read. Approach with caution. I’ll summarize it in the next paragraph, which you can skip if you have a weak stomach.
Over nearly 300 pages, the report tells of a fetid, malodorous, blood-and-feces splattered clinic stocked with rusted, stained, and broken equipment. Of fetal remains stuffed everywhere—in refrigerators, milk jugs, cat-food boxes, and even a bizarre collection of several fetal feet displayed in jars. Of medical-waste-filled boxes leaking blood onto the floor. Of unwashed and contaminated medical instruments spreading disease. Of third-term live births cut short after Gosnell or associates would “snip” them at the neck to “ensure fetal demise.” Of one baby delivered into a toilet and thrashing around so that it appeared to be “swimming,” whereupon it was lifted from the commode and had its neck slit. Of one baby whose weight was estimated at six pounds, whereupon Gosnell reportedly “joked” that it was big enough to “walk me to the bus stop.” Of him also joking as one baby writhed while he slit its neck, “that’s what you call a chicken with its head cut off.”
Dr. Gosnell is a black abortionist. Some have suggested that at first the media gave scant notice to his trial because it involved the tarnishing of two progressive sacred cows—abortion and black people. In a perverse sense, he’s very lucky he wasn’t a white doctor shooting black babies with a gun.
For one side of this tedious team sport, guns are only meant to kill. To the other side, abortion is only meant to kill.
I have news for both sides. Guns and abortions are both only meant to kill. That’s a statement of fact, not a value judgment. I may be the odd bird in the flock here in that I admit I don’t necessarily think killing other humans is always bad. Where I’m the Uber-weirdo is that I see them as all human, despite their morphological or ideological differences from me. If someone were trying to kill me, I’d do my best to squash him or her like a roach without blinking. And since I feel the world already has far too many people, I don’t see anything wrong with aborting many (if not most) fetuses before they plop all wet and slimy into the world and further degrade the ecosystem.
Not all abortionists behave like Kermit Gosnell. Then again, not all gun owners behave like Adam Lanza. And not all racists behave like Adolf Hitler. And not all egalitarians behave like Mao. Yet the infantile modern-day left/right herd mentality is ever eager to jump in a toboggan and careen down the slippery slope.
But as is the case with all binary political discourse these days, one side seized the details to attack, while the other side avoided the details and tried to deflect the sunlight. Some blamed abortion itself; others blamed a culture of poverty that sent poor women to clinics such as these. Very few mentioned that condoms or morning-after pills could have averted the whole bloody Grand Guignol banquet.
Perched as I am on another planet, I try to take the middle road. On one hand, this case doesn’t say much about an unregulated free market, because Gosnell was making loads of cash—one estimate had it at $15K a day—not only on third-trimester abortions, but on peddling pain medication. On the other, it doesn’t say much for government regulation because state officials ignored nearly two decades’ worth of complaints about the clinic. If government workers can’t be trusted to regulate a private clinic, who but a fool would trust them to clean their own house?
Far be it from me to eagerly stomp on everyone’s toes, but the private and public sectors are both filled with human beings. Therein lies the problem. With rare exceptions, humans can’t be trusted.
Despite the universal human urge to paint everything in moralistic terms, it seems obvious to me that nature is amoral. Just as all societies condemn murder unless they’re murdering people they don’t deem to be human, there’s an almost universal human definition of good and evil:
If it enhances my survival, it’s good. If it harms it, it’s evil.
It’s the application of that definition that becomes insanely subjective. I can’t think of a war in history where the combatants didn’t think they were on the “good” side fighting the “evil” side. What are the odds?
And that’s why political discourse, at least these days, consists of little more than apes flinging feces at one another. It’s a social-status game to prove the other side is morally “evil” rather than factually wrong.
The feminists fatales who run their necks about their “bodies” and their “rights” consistently ignore the presumed rights of the little bodies growing inside them, as well as the rights of the sperm donors without whom those little bodies never could have been created. “Rights,” as well as who gets to define what’s right and wrong, are zero-sum games and always have been.
Same goes for who gets to define what constitutes murder.