Thursday, May 3, 2012

The Holocaust of tomorrow

I've long said that I'm not overly concerned with that most famous of holocausts that already happened.  It happened.  We are told the important thing is that we learn from it. Despite the fact that it, like slavery and civil rights, is kept in front of us on almost a daily basis, I fear we are not learning anything from it at all. Thomas McDonald demonstrates the case in point.

Utterly, utterly mind numbing.  This is how it begins.  Any student of even Basic History 101 knows that before there was 'The Holocaust', there were those baby steps that the Nazis took to get there.  The Holocaust, after all, was merely the final solution.  There were plenty of attempts before that to answer a host of questions.  And building on the scientifically driven attempts to redefine humanity as nothing other than glorified animals who should be treated as such, it wasn't long before the Nazi party figured out the first part of 'How to build your own Master Race.'  You can't have the crippled, infirm, mentally ill, or others getting in the way, draining society, and polluting the gene pool.  As this little poster demonstrates:

The sign is translated: “60,000 Reichsmarks is what this person suffering from a hereditary defect costs the People’s community during his lifetime. Fellow citizen, that is your money too.”

Anything sound familiar? Notice the eerie resemblance to many of the mantras today.  First, the appeal to the financial costs of keeping people who are less than perfect.  Remind anyone of anything?  You know, like the cost of obesity?  Are you taking notes yet?  

Second, there is that underlying assumption that human life is, by definition, not sacred.  It is, on the contrary, subjective.  What one person's idea of human life is may not be another person's human life.  The idea that this person with a hereditary defect is set apart from the community strongly suggests that there are people, and there are real people. 

This sign was, of course, a testimony to Germany's euthanasia project, the precursor of the Holocaust, in which such terms as 'quality of lfie' were used to illustrate the notion that there was, indeed, some human life that simply fell out of the 'worthy of the right to live' domain.  That is, naturally, the foundational ethic behind our abortion rights culture.  The entire abortion rights argument hinges on the idea that human life is an abstract concept, in which the State has every right to arbitrarily decide when one is or is not human.  In keeping with America's modern religion of hedonism and narcissism, the Courts have obliged by allowing that arbitrary decision to be placed in the hands of doctors and their patients.

There's a good chance a rocket scientist might miss the implications,but an average yokel with common sense would be able to connect the dots, and figure that the next logical step - that if human life inside the womb is arbitrarily defined as human or not, what's to say that little birth canal means anything, and human life outside the womb may be just as subjectively defined - isn't far behind.  In fact, as I blogged about some time ago, the idea that parents might be able to simply euthanize their babies after the babies are born for any one of a list of reasons is already being kicked around by our best and brightest.  Since we know that the Nazis were just ignorant thugs who hated intellectuals and scientists, it's smart that we instead put our undying trust in intellectuals and scientists to explain such complicated issues to us.  It's not like intellectuals and scientists had anything to do with those horrible genocide and human experimentation things in the last century or anything.

Of course all of this is simply one more step away from being on deck and getting to the home plate of full blown genocide.  Right now, our good Dr. Phil is helping us break down even more antiquated barriers based on the ridiculous notion of life's sanctity by allowing this good woman to pine for the right to mercifully euthanize her seriously disabled children.  Dr. Phil's audience, the same audience that helped Oprah and Phil Donahue convince our nation that there was no higher truth than that which confirmed the right to abortions, gay sex, suicide, and the knowledge that all religion is evil and the Divine Spirit in the sky is merely an abstract concept by which we measure our pain (St. John Lennon 3:15), chimes in with overwhelming support for this poor mother's request to kill her disabled, and quite grown, children.

I know.  Take a breath.  It's not easy when you look into our televisions and start to realize that when you think you're seeing a revolution that promises something like this:

You might be seeing a future that will look more like this:

But we're going to have to do something soon, or we will have passed the sell-by date of our ability to save our civilization.  As so many in the emergent secular Left cheer for the likes of Dan 'death to religion' Savage, as it promotes decadencesexism, bigotry, hate and rage, and yearns for the end of religions that they don't like, some resistance is going to have to happen.  Peaceful of course.  But resistance nonetheless.  Burying heads in sand, fighting amongst ourselves, ignoring the coming storm, blaming each other for not being pure like me, all of these things are helping us toward the day when first this:

Then this:

And finally this:

Will be the stuff which is gleefully put to the axe, not for some "higher notion" of national pride, imperial conquest, or racial purity.  But in keeping with the deplorable muck and mire that is post-modern debauchery and hell inspired hedonism, all of this will be so that our enlightened age can cash in on the promise of Orgasms and IPads (as opposed to meat and circuses or bread and peace). Pretty pathetic I know.  But it's not a case of if, now it's merely a case of when.  Be warned.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Let me know your thoughts