Just being human doesn’t grant you a right to life, says Princeton University ethicist Peter Singer, according to LifeSiteNews.
You have to be human and something else to qualify for not being killed. Presumably Singer would say you have to be human and Peter Singer to have a right to life. But once you give others the right to decide what comes after the “and” you’re going to have blood being spilled.
Once you caveat humanity things get ugly in a hurry.
You have to be human and…a member of the Communist party.
You have to be human and…not a Jew.
You have to be human and…not disabled.
You have to be human and…a boy.
As wacky as it sounds, Singer isn’t all that different from many pro-abortion rights leaders.
Remember when Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told the New York Times about how she thought abortion would be used to target certain populations.
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of,” she said.
Hmmm. I always wonder which groups she was worried about having too many of.
The thing about Singer is that at least unapologetic about his anti-life logic. You have to give him props for that. He holds a parade for his crazy and invites the world to see. The money grabbers of Big Abortion and the pro-euthanasia crowd work best in shadows. They know they can’t say that stuff so they talk about “choice” and “rights” when what they really mean is that some people just don’t qualify for being human and need some killing.
They define life in a certain way and the sentence for falling short of that definition is death.
