Animal Rights vs. Abortion
When you [try to] follow the logic found on the ALF website, and reprinted in part below, you realize that logic has very little to do with it. Unless you first believe:
-
Human beings are not special over and above other animals
-
Humans are the scourge of the earth, and the world would actually be better off without them
-
Only certain humans deserve life, those whom respect, love [dare I ay] worship the earth, or are useful in bringing about the New Earth dis-Order [more on that in a subsequent blog]
-
[Speaking of worship] God doesn’t exist, except perhaps as Mother Earth and Father Sun, so humans made in God’s image just makes no sense
-
Quality of Life and Social Justice are King and Queen, so if you abort a human before they are sensient, to avoid suffering or improve society as you see it, you have done no harm, and probably done good!
http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Philosophy/Abortion%20versus%20Animal%20Rights.htm
Excerpts:
“
(1) Minimizing Principle
When faced with choosing between harming the few who are innocent or harming the many, and when all those who will be harmed face a prima facie comparable harm, then we ought to choose to override the rights of the few.
To apply this principle to the abortion issue, we might, for example, argue that in order to reduce the suffering of existing humans and non-humans from human over-population, we must yield to the unpleasant necessity of abortion in situations where alternative birth controls are not available or accepted.
(2) Worst-Off Principle
When faced with choosing to harm the many or the few who are innocent, and when the harm faced by the few would make them worse-off than any of the many, then we ought to override the rights of the many rather than the few.
By “worst-off” we only mean that there be some wide-spread deprivation (not a radical harm) of a greater number to prevent the greater harm to a few. With respect to the abortion issue, it could be argued that human overpopulation is arguably a radical harm for all.
(3) Benefit Of Doubt Principle
Let us contemplate, given our uncertainty and extensive ignorance about fetuses, that a benefit of the doubt consideration applies to treat fetuses “as if” they are due basic rights, naturally keeping in mind that we may well be giving them more than is their due.
A life of potential suffering that might be unavoidable for a profoundly retarded “human vegetable” may outweigh what momentary pain could result from an abortion.”
This is chilling. It is well known, beyond this that famous Marine Biologist Jacque Cousteau advocated not just Population Control, but actually Population Reduction!
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.”
- Jacques Cousteau, 1991 UNESCO courier [Thanks to twitter.com fellow patriot!]
Ted Turner - “We’re too many people; that’s why we have global warming,” he said. “Too many people are using too much stuff,” adding that “on a voluntary basis, everybody in the world’s got to pledge to themselves that one or two children is it.”
Turner himself failed to live up to such a pledge, having fathered five children, but continues to lecture the rest of us on how we should limit our procreation.
