Morality for Survival

There are a couple of things that brought this post about. The Deacon knows someone who's child needs speech therapy. You'd expect a school to offer that, right? Nope. Well, you'd expect insurance to cover it, as speaking is a life necessity, right? Maybe, but not the type of insurance that you pay for, the type you buy to ensure quality of care, no, only state supported insurance would pay for that. So, what's going to happen to that child? Who knows? We'd rather argue about health care than actually care about things this meaningless, why stop and consider an individual plight when we're fighting for our country, for the survival of Capitalism!

Then, last night's Daily Show, where the woman who came up with "Death Panel" after reading the health care "bill" was on to discuss it. Well, if you believe her, watch it and see if she finds it (hint: she doesn't) leafing through the bill (that doesn't actually exist - why doesn't anyone realize THERE IS NO HEALTH CARE BILL RIGHT NOW!)

Both of these things made me think - fewer people = cheaper. Then that made me think about pro-life people wanting welfare mothers to have multiple babies so that we can pay for them until they are 18, and then probably their kids.

When was there a big push on abortion being immoral? Sometime in the early 1900s? Why does that time period ring a bell? When did the New Deal happen, to help more Americans survive, end of the 1930s, early 1940s? Hmm. Why does that time period stick out as well? Oh, yeah, World Wars. What does a country need when it goes to war? Money? Sure. Resources? Sure. Expendable bodies? Exactly.

So, when you think you have a strong moral code because your country has enforced the idea that newborns should be born, that the weak should survive, remember the underlying reason. Expend-ability.

No one should kill your children or grandparents - and, no one actually wants to. That's completely against our survival.