We note with sympathy the cruelty of our recent but hanging around winter, leaving us a bit hornswoggled at the enormity of righteous indignation demonstrated in a news article today. The story was a simple one, reporting the thrifty burning of “clinical waste” to heat U.K. hospitals. A productive use of trash helps a sustainable earth, right?
Somehow though, the fact that the “clinical waste” includes the corpses of aborted babies seems to bother these folk. Shouldn’t everyone have expected this? Would they feel better if the “trash” just went into dumpsters? Burning for heat is at least, productive. It seems to us that there is some confusion of thought here.
The big abortion debate is usually over whether “the fetus” is a human being. Pro-abortion folk say it isn’t a human being until after it reaches fresh air. Pro-baby folk of course, disagree, claiming it is a human being as soon as one sperm “hooks up” with one egg. They are of course, arguing beside the point: the fertilized egg is something, certainly, what is it, a duck-billed platypus? It’s inarguably homo sapiens. The honest and therefore, ignored issue is actually: Who has the right to kill a human being for their convenience?
For Mommy to do that, she has to first, throw God under the bus since He is on record forbidding the act. With Him gone, she is become a creature of the state, for lack of any other superior power and needs government permission. And government can give such permission only by regarding human life as a disposable without any right to live of its own. Mommy of course, must share that view.
And if you take that view of life, where’s the problem tossing the remains of anyone into the furnace? Or using it productively as Soylent Green ..?