The Cruel and Insane World of Humanism
By David J. Stewart
In 1982, the California Supreme Court ruled that a child could sue for being born. It is a referred to legally as a Wrongful Life Action. The suit was brought against a Sacramento hospital. The courts required the hospital to pay $900,000 in damages (Source: Turpin v. Sortini, 31, Cal. 3 220). The computation of damages in a Wrongful Life Action are based on the claim that the value of the life of a disabled child is less than the value of never having been born. The California Supreme Court, in Turpin v. Sortini, 31 Cal.3d 220, 182 Cal. Rptr. 337, 643 P.2d 954 (1982), stated that the wrongful life action is another form of a Medical Malpractice Action.
In 1973, New York's highest court ruled that the New York State Legislature must determine which human beings are actually persons who are entitled to live [Source: Byrn v. New York City Health and Hospital Corp., 31 NY 2d. 194,335 NYS 2d. 390,393 (1972), Appeal dismissed, 410 US 949 (1973).]
If our courts can decide that unborn children are not persons, they can also decide that people over sixty are no longer persons; or that deformed children are not persons; or that patients on life support are no longer persons, et cetera. It is evil. The courts do not have a moral right to decide who lives or dies.
In 1979, the Attorney General of Delaware issued an opinion stating that a doctor who had failed to kill two unborn babies with lethal saline injections could be sued for criminal malpractice! (Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, June 9, 1979).
This is so sad. When a baby was born with a birth defect in a Bloomington, Indiana hospital, the parents decided they did not want it. The case of Infant Doe was taken to the courts. The lower court ruled that the baby did not have a right to live. The decision was appealed, but the appeals court ruled that the lower court had the jurisdiction to make the decision that it did. The courts then sealed the records. Nurses who heard the baby crying were prohibited from giving the baby any food. Finally, the baby was locked in a closet and the door was barred. After six days, the baby starved to death. [Source: Infant Doe v. Bloomington Indiana Hospital (1982). Records have been sealed by court order.]
Humanism is of the Devil
This is the insane thinking, apathy and cruelty of unbelievers who hold to humanistic philosophies. Humanism excludes God and His Word from reality. To the Humanist, humans are nothing more than a higher form of animal in the evolutionary process. Hitler was a devout admirer of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species. Evolution teaches that only the strong survive. Hitler said, "The Jews formed a sub-human counter race, predestined by their biological heritage to evil, just as the Nordic race was destined for nobility." Is that not the same as Charles Darwin's theory of NATURAL SELECTION, from his 1859 groundbreaking book, The Origin of Species? Yes, it certainly is! Whether it be Nazism or Communism, BOTH ideologies are rooted in the atheistic viewpoints of Evolution and Humanism.
When the killing of unborn children is made legal, it is not a very big step to rationalize the killing of unwanted infants...
Why Obama Really Voted For Infanticide
More important to protect abortion doctors than “that fetus, or child — however way you want to describe it.”
By Andrew C. McCarthy | August 22, 2008
There wasn’t any question about what was happening. The abortions were going wrong. The babies weren’t cooperating. They wouldn’t die as planned. Or, as Illinois state senator Barack Obama so touchingly put it, there was “movement or some indication that, in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead.”
No, Senator. They wouldn’t go along with the program. They wouldn’t just come out limp and dead.
They were coming out alive. Born alive. Babies. Vulnerable human beings Obama, in his detached pomposity, might otherwise include among “the least of my brothers.” But of course, an abortion extremist can’t very well be invoking Saint Matthew, can he? So, for Obama, the shunning of these least of our brothers and sisters — millions of them — is somehow not among America’s greatest moral failings.
No. In Obama’s hardball, hard-Left world, these least become “that fetus, or child — however you want to describe it.”
Most of us, of course, opt for “child,” particularly when the “it” is born and living and breathing and in need of our help. Particularly when the “it” is clinging not to guns or religion but to life.
But not Barack Obama. As an Illinois state senator, he voted to permit infanticide. And now, running for president, he banks on media adulation to insulate him from his past.
The record, however, doesn’t lie.
Infanticide is a bracing word. But in this context, it’s the only word that fits. Obama heard the testimony of a nurse, Jill Stanek. She recounted how she’d spent 45 minutes holding a living baby left to die.
The child had lacked the good grace to expire as planned in an induced-labor abortion — one in which an abortionist artificially induces labor with the expectation that the underdeveloped “fetus, or child — however you want to describe it” will not survive the delivery.
Stanek encountered another nurse carrying the child to a “soiled utility room” where it would be left to die. It wasn’t that unusual. The induced-labor method was used for late-term abortions. Many of the babies were strong enough to survive the delivery. At least for a time.
So something had to be done with them. They couldn’t be left out in the open, struggling in the presence of fellow human beings. After all, those fellow human beings — health-care providers — would then be forced to confront the inconvenient question of why they were standing idly by. That would hold a mirror up to the whole grisly business.
Better the utility room. Alone, out of sight and out of mind. Next case.
Stanek’s account enraged the public and shamed into silence most of the country’s staunchest pro-abortion activists. Most, not all. Not Barack Obama.
My friend Hadley Arkes ingeniously argued that legislatures, including Congress, should take up “Born Alive” legislation: laws making explicit what decency already made undeniable: that from the moment of birth — from the moment one is expelled or extracted alive from the birth canal — a human being is entitled to all the protections the law accords to living persons.
Such laws were enacted by overwhelming margins. In the United States Congress, even such pro-abortion activists as Sen. Barbara Boxer went along.
But not Barack Obama. In the Illinois senate, he opposed Born-Alive tooth and nail.
The shocking extremism of that position — giving infanticide the nod over compassion and life — is profoundly embarrassing to him now. So he has lied about what he did. He has offered various conflicting explanations, ranging from the assertion that he didn’t oppose the anti-infanticide legislation (he did), to the assertion that he opposed it because it didn’t contain a superfluous clause reaffirming abortion rights (it did), to the assertion that it was unnecessary because Illinois law already protected the children of botched abortions (it didn’t — and even if it arguably did, why oppose a clarification?).
What Obama hasn’t offered, however, is the rationalization he vigorously posited during the 2002 Illinois senate debate.
SOURCE: Why Obama Really Voted For Infanticide by Andrew C. McCarthy on National Review Online
Barack Obama is a Devil. It is not surprising to me that a devout Communist like Obama has no value for human life. Communism has always been synonymous with brutality, mass-killings and genocide. Communism, Humanism and Evolution are all demonic and sworn enemies to freedom.
Humanism and Roe v. Wade
One of the most obvious examples of a court's decision based on Humanistic principles was the 1973 Supreme Court ruling which legalized abortion on demand [Source: Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)]. The Humanistic philosophy behind the court's decision was the belief that man is only a species of animal, a result of billions of years of evolutionary process (Source: Humanist Manifesto I, Tenet 2). Thus, the Supreme Court legislated morality—a morality of death by shedding innocent blood. Nearly 50-million babies have been brutally murdered by abortion since 1973!!! That's nearly 10-times the amount of Jews holocausted by Hitler during WWII. It should not, therefore, come as a shock to learn that the legal philosophy which allowed the Nazis to kill Jews is the EXACT same legal philosophy that allows Americans to mercilessly kill unborn babies. God calls it murder... "Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 20:13).
Few U.S. citizens realize just how Communist America is today. Wake up America! Ask this distraught father if he lives in "The Land of the Free"? Ask the family of Terri Schiavo if they and Terri live in a "free country"? Ask these parents if they agree with Lee Greenwood's fantasy about freedom in America. Woe unto America!
It's clear that those who believe in God, morals and the Bible care about the unborn, the disabled, the weak, the old and the unwanted; whereas those who adhere to humanistic views tend to selfishly support abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and share a general lack of respect for human life.
“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”
—Charles de Montesquieu
Ye Must Be Born Again! | You Need HIS Righteousness!