As usual, last week on the 4th of July around 5:00 a.m. I arose and Gracie and our houseguest Zeus headed over to the dog park. Apparently, for dogs as well as humans, bodily functions do not recognize the significance of official Holidays.
We went to the park but stayed only briefly because by 6:30 it was already beginning to get hot. I could see that the fire that has now consumed about 7,000 acres north of Las Vegas on Mt. Charleston was still out of control. Large almost cumulus-like clouds hung in the air, but rather than being white they were charcoal in color.
Perhaps it was the poor air quality that started me sneezing. To my knowledge I don’t have any allergies. I also didn’t have any tissues with me nor did any of my friends at the park. So, getting tired of snorting the mucous back into my throat, I decided to stop by the little convenience store on the way home and pick up a small pack of tissues.
It took me a few minutes to find these and pay for my purchase – which I began using in the store before I had paid for them – ah, what a relief – and when I went outside there were three teenage boys standing at the side of the door. One of them very politely said, “Excuse me. Could you help us?”
I thought that they were going to ask for some change.
“How can I help you?”
“Well, we was wondering if we give you the money, would you go inside the store and buy us a can of malt liquor?” said the one I took to be the oldest – perhaps 15 years or so. Of course, doing so is a violation of our liquor laws, and more importantly is just wrong. So that wasn’t going to happen. But I didn’t say that.
Instead, it being the 4th of July I said, “I’ll tell you what. I’m going to ask you a question about America – this being Independence Day – and if you can give me the correct answer I’ll think about buying the malt liquor for you.”
They seemed to perk up with the hope that I had given them. But before I asked them my question I inquired what grades they were in at school. Two were in the eighth grade and the oldest had completed his freshman year of high school.
“Okay, guys – name any one of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America.”
I thought this was a pretty easy question and I know that at their age I would have had no difficulty naming quite a few of them. But instead of a response, I got a dazed look from all three. Then came the most telling statement from one of the eighth graders.
He looked at me and said, “Foundin’ Fathers. I don’t knows none of dem. Hell, I don’t even know who the M*ther F*cker was whoz my own father.”
To dredge up the old aphorism, “You could have knocked me over with a feather,” at this response. I’m sure that my mouth was open wide enough that you could have easily fit a large pizza in it and had room left over.
But I recovered and told the boys that by asking an adult to buy them liquor, everyone could get in trouble and there were reasons that we didn’t allow minors to drink. I doubt I made much of an impression as they were still hanging out at the front of the convenience store as I pulled away with the dogs.
Perhaps this is what we now consider the new “normal”. One of my dictionaries defines “normal” as “conforming to the standard or common type; usual; regular; natural.” It goes on to give a secondary definition: “free from any mental disorder; sane.”
I would put forward the argument that there is nothing sane about any government’s policies which encourages mass reproduction in an already over-crowded world and rewards those who conform to that normality with increased compensation which is insufficient to raise a child in a wholesome manner; at the same time, mandates the universal availability of abortions in the event the mother at that particular moment has something more pressing to do than bring another offspring into the word; that then provides an inferior education – if any at all – to these offspring who are allowed to be born, leaving them with little alternative but to repeat the mistakes their mothers (and absent) fathers made; and then preaches that the greatest threat to planet Earth is global warming.
Or perhaps we are missing something from the equation.
I don’t want to sound cynical but I do not believe that the government’s concern for this underclass that they have created over multiple decades goes to the welfare of these slaves. But they serve an important, albeit momentary, purpose.
That purpose is to allow those in office (and who manipulate their strings behind the scenes) to seize more power for themselves. Once entrenched, propelled into their positions by a mindless electorate, fawning, as though they were dogs at their master’s table, hoping that a crumb or two will drop for them to devour, the great unwashed will have fulfilled their purpose and at that point become irrelevant and their continued existence unnecessary.
And tyranny will have come to America. But a far greater and more brutal one than the world has ever seen.
Why the dichotomy between rewarding the natural process of child bearing through government subsidies and, at the same time, offering unnaturally to terminate that process? Might it not be to condition our thinking into “normalizing” the idea that an unborn fetus has little worth and no rights. And if something unborn that merely looks human has no worth – why not apply the same principle to those who have been born but who do not produce or contribute anything that society deems important and of value?
I have argued since the advent of Roe v. Wade how that decision leads us down the slippery slope toward that kind of “ultimate solution.” That argument was not based on any religious philosophy or morality which is, essentially, unarguable. It was based on a doctrine of self-preservation.
We have already marched in the direction of being able to discriminate about who it is we allow to be born (in the same way that Hitler proposed eugenic solutions to the world’s problems). And while those choices, however heinous they might be, are presently left to the individual, it is not a far reach to imagine that soon that choice may be made on our behalf by those “enlightened” ones who will be running our healthcare system.
At one point, with a limited population and comparatively primitive methods of producing food, we needed an underclass to spend their lives in slavery, in the fields, bringing in the crops that the privileged required to survive. They may have been second class citizens but they were a necessary part of the economy.
Today, technology has largely eliminated the need for this group of people. And rather than being important, though humble contributors, they are now devouring the fruits they once brought to the table by the sheer numbers in which they exist. In other words, they are more of a burden than a benefit to society.
Is it really difficult to make the transition from the concept that “abortion is a woman’s right” to “it is the right of the government to determine how many children may be born and to whom?” China went down that road.
And from there, is it really all that extreme to imagine a government which has taken to itself the right to determine “for the common good” – not only those who might be allowed to reproduce – but which of those who have already been born, serve a meaningful purpose that conforms to the government’s concepts of what is in everyone’s best interests. The step toward euthanasia is a very short one from where we are today. Obamacare and its equivalents in other countries where the state runs medical care are the first step down the path to darkness.
So in light of all that, it shouldn’t surprise us at the President’s statement that “Global Warming” is the greatest threat to planet Earth. Assuming that he actually believes that, what better way is there to reduce human impact on our planet than to cull and reduce the human population? Problem solved.
Like the Founding Fathers who girded themselves for the battle, let this be an open statement to the future Eugenics Police who may come for me.
I’m armed and won’t go down without a fight.
Happy belated Birthday, America.