Whose Life is It, Anyway?

I read an article the other day, and this one today, that really got me thinking.  Whose life is it, anyway?

There are three central tenets of modern Ultra-Left ideology: 1) We should all live at about the same relative level of satisfaction, based on our self-perception of that level of satisfaction; 2) People who have faith in Science and none in God are the only beings qualified to render judgment on us all (who also happen to be entitled to the trappings of excess due to their heavy burden); and 3) my life is not my own until I reach the maturity to consent, at which point my life is entirely based around my own consent unless it conflicts with Tenets 1 or 2.

We all got here somehow.  We have footprints in the sand, both literal and figurative, that provide an overview of the past.  The tales are legion of the societies and cultures where nothing is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.  The operative word here is “hater”.  “I cannot stand Christians, they are such haters!”

Oddly enough, it is hateful to be against abortion-on-demand, but loving to be in favor of a child being raised without two biological parents.  It is hateful to want a plebiscite to be fair but loving to excuse non-citizens from any personal responsibility for their actions.  It is hateful to allow a child to play in a park .5 miles from home, but loving to support my 5-year-old in choosing their self-identified gender.

It is hateful to criticize an Attorney General who happens to be black for his actions, but loving to refer to a citizen concerned about their children’s future as a “TeaBagger”.

And the list goes on.  We all have our perception of intolerance, bigotry and hatred.  Many people grab on to those words and use them as if they were a zero-sum game, with only winners and losers.

I have seen several shows which purport that 97% of all peer-reviewed journals agree on man-made “climate change”.  That isn’t quite as solid as the unanimous belief for over 1,500 years that the Sun revolved around the Earth.  Scientists tend to place great stock in initial discoveries, such as the relationship between the shape of your head and personality.

A group of people, once convinced of the moral superiority of their cause, then take to quiet congregation to disseminate their strategy for domination.  They want their leaders to force through subjugation and they don’t mind the cost in terms of human life or suffering, for they are the righteous and we are the benighted few.

It is my life if I consent, unless I am intolerant, a bigot or a hater.  Our government will not tolerate intolerance, hates haters and believes that racism is the animus for conservative thinking.  What was once a vehement protection of individual liberty has become the vehement prosecution of individual liberty.  The bullies are empowered to bully and encouraged to blame conservatives and Christians for their ills.

Oddly enough, of the 50 worst polluters, we are not on the list.  It makes the most sense, then, for us to focus on berating ourselves while allowing “developing” countries to do their best to kill off their citizenry.  Is it any surprise that there is a correlation between liberty and pollution?

If you take a step back and look at the sum total of discussion around today’s events, there is a discernible pattern.  We have gone to a results-based morality.  Abortion is moral because the result is population control and avoidance of societal ills related to single-mother parenting.  The steps to the result are simply irrelevant.

In results-based morality, I can fly in an airplane to a Climate Change conference because the result is further legislation saving the planet.  The steps to achieve that result are irrelevant.  In a results-based morality, I can force a business owner to live against their faith because the result is the elimination of “immoral” viewpoints and “antiquated” thinking.

Ultimately, the advocates of the Ultra-Left want all life to be within their control and they want their own like-thinkers to make decisions on that basis.  And in that world, the value of life is defined by the adherence of that life to whatever viewpoint is theirs that day.  The value of morality in that marketplace is nil, but the lip-service to morality is pervasive.  No wonder one side of the debate is about Choice while the other is about Life.