Wednesday, 19 September 2012

Islamists and secularists: points for sheer gall!

There were two particularly appalling stories that appeared in the media yesterday that surely have to get points for sheer outrageous gall.

Murdering babies is ok if you call it 'selecting genes'!

The first appeared in The Punch with the headline "There's nothing nasty, or Nazi, about gene selection" - because apparently 'selecting genes' is somehow ok even if in fact, as the article makes clear, what you are actually talking about is selecting which babies will live, and which will be exterminated.

Here is a sample:

"The natural lottery of choosing genes from a couple has no mind to health, happiness, fulfilment or anything we value. It is a random process. It distributes dispositions to violence, psychopathy, altruism, fairness and so on randomly. We should use science and our values to select offspring – rational evolution. We can and should do better than chance. At very least, we should be free to try..."

"Should we decide what breed of humans to create? Some people believe that children are a gift, of God or Nature, and that we should not interfere in human nature. Most people implicitly reject this view – we already routinely screen embryos and foetuses for diseases."

"In the case of genetic selection, the children who come to exist as a result of selection could have been chosen by chance. And they have a reason to be grateful insofar as their lives are good. We should give chance a helping hand."

The author was Julian Savulescu is Sir Louis Matheson Distinguished Visiting Professor at Monash University and Chair in Practical Ethics at University of Oxford.

Eureka Street: criticising homosexuality and rioting in the streets are on a par!

The other story was by Muslim apologist Irfan Yusuf and appeared in (surprise, surprise) Jesuit rag Eureka Street under the headline,"Who is the loudest and ugliest religious donkey"?

And it attempted to argue that those who pointed out the facts about the consequences of the homosexual lifestyle, argue against gay marriage, or make other stands on issues dear to Christians, are on a par to the ugly events of last weekend.  It also attacks those leaders of the Islamic community who apologised for the events.

Unfortunately, the forces at work in Australia are very far from being donkeys, despite the best efforts of those working within to subvert, obscure and persuade us otherwise.


Arthur said...

Humanly speaking, Australian Catholicism is doomed.

Not only do we not have a single bishop in this country whom any pope before Pius XII would regard as anything more than a malodorous heretic, but we laity are compelled, in practice, to fight on THREE fronts.

We must fight against Islam. We must fight against Protestantism. And simultaneously we must fight against secularism. It can't be done.

When Our Lord said that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church, He meant merely that She would exist somewhere in the world till the end of time. He did not mean "every pervert priest and heterodox bishop through the length and breadth of Terra Australis deserves a job for life."

But I suspect that Cardinal Pell is too busy fraternising with local nabobs from "the religion of peace" to bother with nobodies like us.

Andrea said...

it would seem that contemporary medicine and bioethics is littered with sanitising euphemisms