HUMAN LIFE AND BEYOND. SECOND SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME
JANUARY 15, 2017
TWO YEARS AGO CHRIS CUOMO, ON CNN’S NEW DAY, HAD AN INTERIEW WITH ALABAMA SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ROY MOORE JUDGE MOORE SAID, "OUR RIGHTS CONTAINED IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS DO NOT COME FROM THE CONSTITUTION, THEY COME FROM GOD." CUOMO REPLIED, "YOUR HONOR OUR LAWS DO NOT COME FROM GOD. THEY COME FROM MAN."
SOMEONE SHOULD REMIND CHRIS CUOMO THAT OUR RIGHTS OF LIFE LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS DO NOT COME FROM MAN OR FROM THE STATE. HUMAN BEINGS ARE FREE PRECISELY BECAUSE OUR RIGHTS COME FROM GOD HIMSELF.
JOHN THE BAPTIST KNEW THAT THE RIGHTS OF MAN COME FROM GOD HIMSELF. HE KNEW THAT ONLY GOD COULD TAKE THEM AWAY. THAT IS WHY JOHN THE BAPTIST DID NOT FEAR TO SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER. KING HEROD COULD KILL HIM BUT HE COULD NOT TAKE AWAY HIS FREEDOM.
WHEN JOHN THE BAPTIST SAW THE SPIRIT DESCENDING UPON THE SON OF GOD HE KNEW THAT ALL THE HERODS OF THE WORLD DID NOT HAVE THE POWER OF THE SON OF GOD.
THE NATIONAL DEBATE THAT IS RAGING IN THIS COUNTRY IS NOT ABOUT EAST AND WEST. THE DEBATE IS ABOUT ATHEISM AND THE INTRINSIC DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE.
THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION TODAY IS: CAN MAN LIVE WITHOUT GOD WHO GIVES DIGNITY TO HUMAN LIFE? CAN MAN LIVE WITHOUT GOD WHO ALONE MAKES THE RIGHTS OF HUMAN BEINGS INALIANABLE?
WHENEVER ATHEISM ENTERS THE DEBATE ABOUT HUMAN LIFE GOD IS ELIMINATED FROM THE DEBATE. WITHOUT GOD THE STATE BECOMES THE MASTER OF HUMAN LIFE AND HUMAN RIGHTS.
WHEN CHRIS CUOMO AND OTHERS SAY THAT OUR RIGHTS COME FROM MAN THEY ARE REALLY SAYING THAT OUR RIGHTS COME FROM THE STATE. THAT’S RISKY BUSINESS. IF THE STATE GIVES US OUR RIGHTS THEN THE STATE CAN TAKE THEM AWAY.
THAT’S HOW FREEDOM WAS LOST IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY IN THE SOVIET UNION, GERMANY, CHINA, CAMBODIA AND PARTS OF AFRICA. WITHOUT GOD THE STATE BECOMES A TYRANT, AND MAN LOSES HIS FREEDOM UNDER GOD. HERE IS WHAT I MEAN:
- PETER SINGER IS THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BIOETHICS AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY. DR. SINGER IS AN ATHEIST.
PROFESSOR SINGER IS ONE OF THE ENLIGHTENED INTELLECTUALS OF OUR TIME WHO BELIEVES THAT A HUMAN BEING HAS NO MORE VALUE THAN PLANTS, MICRO-ORGANISMS, ANIMALS, RIVERS AND STREAMS.
THIS IS WHAT HE IS TEACHING OUR STUDENTS AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY. THIS IS WHAT HE IS TEACHING THE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN WHO WILL BE WORKING IN THE HEALTH INDUSTRY, IN GOVERNMENT AND IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES.
PETER SINGER BELIEVES IN THE “PERSONHOOD THEORY”. HE DENIES THE EXISTENCE OF THE HUMAN SOUL. HE DENIES THE INTRINSIC VALUE OF A HUMAN BEING SIMPLY BECAUSE HE IS HUMAN—SIMPLY BECAUSE HE IS THE IMAGE OF GOD.
PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO THIS BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT OUR YOUNG PEOPLE ARE LEARNING IN SOME UNIVERSITIES.
PETER SINGER HAS DREAMED UP A NEW CATEGORY OF HUMANS CALLED NON-PERSONS. THE HUMAN NON-PERSON DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME VALUE AS OTHER HUMAN PERSONS. SUCH NON-PERSONS, THEREFORE LOSE ALL THIR RIGHTS ESPECIALLY THE RIGHT TO LIFE.
SINGER HAS TWO REQUIREMENTS FOR BEING A PERSON. A PERSON IS SOMEONE WHO IS SELF-AWARE OVER TIME. A PERSON IS SOMEONE WHO HAS MINIMAL COGNITIVE CAPACITIES. IN OTHER WORDS SOMEONE WHO IS CONSCIOUS AND KNOWS THAT HE IS ALIVE.
WHAT ARE HIS CONCLUSIONS? A NEWBORN INFANT IS NOT SELF-AWARE AND DOES NOT HAVE MINIMAL COGNITIVE CAPACITIES. THEREFORE A NEWBORN INFANT IS A NON-PERSON. A PERSON IN A COMA IS NOT AWARE AND DOES NOT HAVE MINIMAL COGNITIVE CAPACITIES. THEREORE A PERSON IN A COMA IS A NON-PERSON.
HE BELIEVES THAT DOCTORS CAN KILL NEWBORN INFANTS BECAUSE THEY ARE NON-PERSONS. PROFESSOR SINGER WOULD GIVE PARENTS ONE OR TWO YEARS WITHIN WHICH TO DECIDE TO KEEP OR KILL THEIR NEWBORN. HE WOULD PUT US BACK TO THE TIME OF THE PAGANS WHO LEFT THEIR UNWANTED CHILDREN ON THE HILLSIDES TO DIE.
IS IT ANY WONDER THAT PETER SINGER IS THE FORMOST PROPONENT OF INFANTICIDE? IS IT ANY WONDER THAT SOME CONGRESSMEN ARE NOT DISTURBED BY PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION?
DO YOU SEE WHERE THIS IS LEADING? ANY HUMAN BEINGS THAT THE HEALTH INDUSTRY WANTS TO USE FOR EXPERIMENTATION ARE CALLED NON-PERSONS; ANY HUMAN BEINGS WHO ARE STILL ALIVE, WHOSE ORGANS THEY WANT TO HARVEST, ARE ARBITRARILY CALLED NON-PERSONS. SO THEY PROCEED TO REMOVE THE ORGANS EVEN BEFORE THE NON-PERSON DIES.
NON-PERSONS MAY BE FETUSES, EMBRYOS, NEWBORNS, DISABLED, AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOST THEIR MENTAL CAPACITIES.NON-PERSONS MAY INCLUDE PEOPLE WITH ALZHEIMERS OR DEMENTIA, AND PEOPLE WHO ARE COMATOSE OR IN A SO-CALLED VEGETATIVE STATE.
PETER SINGER AND HIS COHORTS WOULD LIKE TO REDEFINE DEATH FOR “NON-PERSONS” SO THAT THEY MIGHT BE ALLOWED TO KILL THEM BY ASSISTED SUICIDE OR EUTHANASIA.
IN AN ARTICLE IN THE NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE PETER SINGER OPENLY ADVOCATED GOVERNMENT RATIONING OF HEALTH CARE. HE MADE IT CLEAR THAT SOCIETY SHOULD BE MORE WILLING TO WITHHOLD TREATMENT FROM THOSE WHO ARE OLD AND THOSE WITH DISABILITIES.
FOR PETER SINGER, HUMAN LIFE DOES NOT HAVE INTRINSIC VALUE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS HUMAN AND HAS AN IMMORTAL SOUL. THE VALUE OF A HUMAN BEING IS RELATIVE TO ITS PHYSICAL AND MENTAL CONDITION. QUALITY OF LIFE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SANCTITY OF LIFE.
HERE IS A DIRECT QUOTE FROM PETER SINGER: “THE DEATH OF A TEENAGER IS A GREATER TRAGEDY THAN THE DEATH OF AN 85-YEAR-OLD; AND THIS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN OUR PRIORITIES…” “SAVING ONE TEENAGER IS EQUIVALENT TO SAVING FOURTEEN 85-YEAR-OLDS.”
PROFESSOR SINGER OPENLY ADMITS THAT EUTHANASIA IS KILLING AND INNOCENT PERSON. HE JUSTIFIES THAT KILLING WITH HIS “QUALITY OF LIFE” ETHIC BASED ON HIS NON-PERSON THEORY.
A DISABILITY GROUP THAT CALLS ITSELF "NOT DEAD YET" HAS FIERCELY OBJECTED TO SINGER'S VIEWS ON EUTHANASIA. SOME REFER TO HIM AS "PROFESSOR DEATH." ONE ADVOCATE FOR THE DISABLED, CALLS SINGER: "THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN THE WORLD TODAY.
WHEN SOMEONE MENTIONED DEATH PANELS IN OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM MANY LAUGHED IN MOCKERY. NOW WE LEARN FROM THE NEWS MEDIATHAT A NEW POLICY CALLS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO PAY DOCTORS TO ADVISE PATIENTS ON OPTIONS FOR ENDING THEIR LIVES. THESE COULD INCLUDE DIRECTIVES TO FORGO AGGRESSIVE TREATMENT THAT COULD EXTEND THEIR LIVES.
THIS POLICY WILL INEVITABLY LEAD TO BUREAUCRATS DECIDING WHO IS FIT TO LIVE AND WHO IS NOT. IF BUREAUCRATS LABEL YOU A NON-PERSON YOU DO NOT QUALIFY FOR FURTHER TREATMENT?
I DON’T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT I DON’T WANT MY LIFE IN THE HANDS OF BUREAUCRATS WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE WORTH OF EVERY HUMAN LIFE FROM THE FIRST MOMENT OF CONCEPTION TO THE LAST MOMENT OF NATURAL DEATH.
WE MAY DISMISS PETER SINGER AS A NUT JOB BUT THE FACT IS THAT HE IS TEACHING FUTURE PROFESSIONALS AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY. HE WAS A CONSULTANT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S. ON HEALTH CARE—YOUR HEALTH CARE AND MY HEALTH CARE.
THE LIFE MOVEMENT IS NOT JUST ABOUT ABORTION. THE WAY WE THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES INVOLVED WITH THE END OF LIFE DEPENDS ON HOW WE THING ABOUT ISSUES INVOLED AT THE BEGINNING OF LIFE.
AN ASSAULT ON HUMAN LIFE IN THE WOMB IS A POTENTIAL ASSAULT ON THE LIFE OF EVERY ONE OF US WHO LIVE OUTSIDE THE WOMB. REMEMBER THAT THE OPPOSITE OF REVERENCE IS VIOLENCE. IF WE DO NOT REVERENCE HUMAN LIFE WE WILL DESTROY IT IN VIOLENCE.
ON SATURDAY OF THIS WEEK AT THE ARMORY IN SYRACUSE AT 12:00 NOON WE WILL BE WALKING IN A PEACEFUL WITNESS TO THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE BECAUSE LIFE AT ALL STAGES IS UNDER ATTACK. I HOPE YOU WILL BE THERE TO DEFEND YOUR LIFE.
ON FRIDAY JANUARY 27 IN WASHINGTON D.C. A HALF MILLION PEOPLE, MOSTLY YOUNG PEOPLE, WILL SHOW UP AT THE WASHINGTON MALL TO ADDRESS THE CONGRESS, THE PRESIDENT AND THE SUPREME COURT.
A HALF MILLION PEOPLE WILL GO TO WASHINGTON WITH A MEGAPHONE TO TELL ALL THE PETER SINGERS OF THE WORLD THAT HUMAN BEINGS ARE MORE THAN FLESH AND BLOOD. THE CONGRESS AND THE SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR FROM THE MOUTHS OF CHILDREN THAT HUMAN LIFE IS SACRED FROM THE FIRST MOMENT OF CONCEPTION TO THE LAST MOMENT OF NATURAL DEATH.