Friday, December 10, 2004

life vs death



There is no rational choice between preserving life and promoting death. No sane mother would kill her unborn child because this person she does not own. No right thinking person would take away his own life whereas he did not give this to himself. No Government with right ethical values would impose death penalty considering that no citizen has surrendered his life thereto.

To be at the same time pro-life under certain circumstances and to be pro-death in certain cases, is a radical contradiction. Reason: The life of every person is exactly equal in value and dignity for the unborn and the elderly, the rich and the poor, the potentate and the helpless, the learned and the ignorant. They differ in personal qualities. But their respective life is categorically the same in reality and truth.

Furthermore, to be pro-life and pro-death at the same same though for different causes is a very dangerous posture. Such ambivalence makes one decide who should be allowed to live and who must be killed. This is arrogance at its best. This is a god-playing role. This is the height of self-deception.

The objective truth is that who lives and who dies is the exclusive prerogative of the Origin of life and the Destiny of those who die. Woe to those who dare arrogate to themselves this providence.

Abortion, euthanasia and death penalty are but other terms for murder. They are all deliberate killings. They are all intentional taking the lives of others. They are all anti-life and wherefore pro-death practices. They are all in effect anti-human whereas they precisely abhor nothing less than human life.

Rocks refuse to be destroyed. Even mere plants urgently grow their branches when cut. All animals immediately run away from the danger of death. And there we have men and women — the supposedly superior species — wanting to kill their own kind, even when this is yet unborn. How strange. How tragic. How pitiful. The mineral, plant and animal kingdoms are wiser.


5 August 2003