Anyone who reads the newspaper (opinion page) must become accustomed to the spewing of nonsense as though it were perfectly sane or remotely factual.
Still, this morning’s letter to the editor from the gentleman in Chiloquin is beyond belief.
After his admission that there ought to be some limits to abortion, he argues for its expansion. We already abort infants up until the very moment of birth, for any reason at all. It’s the No.1 killer in the world. The debate now includes whether abortion after birth ought to be legal as well. How much more do you propose to expand the practice?
Then the kicker: we must sacrifice infants for the sake of the planet, he argues, as though Mother Earth is some demonic overlord whose bloodlust must be sated.
Abortion is “a necessity for survival as we reach the tipping point,” he says. The nonsensical but oft-repeated claim that the earth can’t support its current population, like imagining there’s not enough sun on the beach for us all, is a convenient excuse for the greedy to impose their destructive will on others.
After all, why should we even bother to save the planet? For posterity? Yes, obviously, but for mine alone; you go ahead and abort yours.
And there’s the rub: though abortion advocates imagine themselves to care about the poor and downtrodden, their answer is that others must die for the benefit of themselves.
Politicians get fat checks from Planned Parenthood, which gets even fatter checks from us taxpayers, while clinics target minorities and poor as undesirables and unworthy to share our oxygen.
Mr. Kalita doesn’t even hide his contempt for life: Be reasonable, he says. Prioritize the global good, he says. Your “parasitic” offspring must be slaughtered so the planet can prosper. No wonder he wants us to divorce our morals from public policy.