Shattering Arguments: The Myths of Overpopulation, Grey Tsunami, & Survival of the Fittest Part 1
How can you say there are too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers! – M. Teresa Without minimizing the complexity of the issue, it is hoped this article might zero-in on some basics, in order to help equip those who are on information-overload and unable to process all aspects of the many battles we’re forced to engage in or endure. Neither is it a generalisation of the failings of anyone involved in either policy-making or front-line health care. It is a warning to Canadians that only with vigilance can we resist this downhill moral slide. “Canada’s long history of stable democracy and respect for human rights did not happen in a vacuum. They are a result of a Christian ethos,” as Michael Wagner explains in his Christian Citizenship Guide. Our lack of understanding of this principle has brought us this far down the “slippery slope” we were warned about by many watchmen like Francis Schaeffer, Joe Borowski, Bernard Nathanson, Heather Stilwell, Mother Teresa, Paul de Parrie, Dr. Carol Everett, Keith Green, Wm. Wilberforce, Randall Terry, Ron Gray, Linda Gibbons, Mary Wagner, Chuck Colson, Denise Mountenay, and the women of Silent No More, to mention just a few. Right-to-die proponents continue to try to convince the public and the courts that the laws against helping another person die should be overturned. Never mind, fellow Christian, that those laws against certain acts or omissions deemed criminal acts are based on biblical law, hashed through due process by elected representatives. As with abortion and same sex “marriage,” the courts seem to feel they have a right to bypass the democratic process, and until they are reminded of their rightful role, they will continue to push their weight to engineer the brave new world that is their vision-by-revision. Media continue to mouth platitudes that paint a compassionate picture of medical murder and suicide, and their indoctrination is effective. The guilt most people now feel at the idea of a loved one suffering through what might be their last days is sufficient to move them to justify what used to be unthinkable: the murder of another human being. But this guilt is born of ignorance of the progress that has been made in pain management, and those who understand that society’s conclusions are wrong—and deadly—must learn how to counter the ‘newspeak’ in any conversation of which they are a part. In most polls and interviews, there are certain assumptions inherent in the very questions that are asked. Read between the lines. Every journalist, news writer, interviewer and pollster has a corporate agenda or his or her own spin on an issue. The rhetoric surrounding the so-called right-to-die issue has gradually seeped like sewage into the craws of the mindless masses, whence it is regurgitated in classrooms, over coffee, and within health-care administration. The resulting attitude will inevitably be the untimely demise of the vulnerable, namely, the costly, the unproductive, the voiceless, and the inconvenient. Sound familiar? Various cases have exemplified the determination of right-to-die groups to accomplish their agenda by using terminally ill people who have said they want control over the circumstances of their death, and by using some in the medical profession who try to establish their ‘right’ to determine when and how a patient should die, overruling even power of attorney and parental wishes. This is our reality now, in 2011. Sooner or later you, too, will be faced with the terrible reality that someone wants you or a loved one dead. If you understand the importance of keeping abreast of these issues, here are a few links to organisations that exist to educate and equip us: Lifesite News; Wesley J Smith; and Priests for Life. Internet users would appreciate Alex Schadenberg’s blog, Alex heads up the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, educating, intervening in specific cases, and co-ordinating efforts to counter this culture of death. Other helpful links are posted on the CHP website. Christian Heritage Party policies state that: “human life...is sacred from conception and has God-given value, regardless of race, age, gender, or physical or mental handicap.” The value of human life is apparent in our deepest human thoughts. When one child is lost, hundreds of people show up to search because that one child has value. CHP Canada recognises the value of each and every life...this is reflected in our policies. “No person, institution, or government shall tolerate, encourage, or decree death by means such as abortion, euthanasia, or suicide. Join your voice with Canada’s only pro-life, pro-family federal political party and endorse the value of life. In Part 2 we will examine some of the subtle but popular utilitarian rhetoric that attempts to justify the direction currently being taken in several end-of-life areas. We’ll get some answers to the frequent question, “Why haven’t I heard this?” It is essential that we fully grasp and expose the implications of every medical and judicial initiative, while doing all we can to restore to this navel-gazing society the true value of each human being, for we are fearfully and wonderfully made!
Other Commentary by Elaine Taylor:
- Why Worry About Canada?
- Freedom to Read Week Feb 23-Mar 1
- It Is What It Is: the New “Whatever”
- Shattering Arguments: The Myths of Overpopulation, Grey Tsunami, & Survival of the Fittest, Part 2
- Shattering Arguments: The Myths of Overpopulation, Grey Tsunami, & Survival of the Fittest Part 1