Really, how creepy was Peter Singer on Q and A last night? He pretty much laid out his nihilistic view of humanity for all to see. If you didn't feel just a little queasy about what he was saying then you need to see a shrink pronto, I reckon!
Even more disturbing was the fact that most of the other panellists thought that his was the voice of reason, and that token conservative Phillip Blond was the real weirdo.
Here's an early sample:
PETER SINGER: Well, I certainly agree that we should have diversity and that children with Down’s syndrome, people with Down’s syndrome can have a lot to offer to particular families and I totally agree that they should get good support.
So far so good. Sounds very nice and life affirming doesn't it? He goes on ...
PETER SINGER: I also would say though that this is - if Down’s syndrome is detected during pregnancy, I think this is a choice that families can make for themselves or that pregnant woman can make for herself. Does she want to have a child with Down’s syndrome? And the fact is that the overwhelming majority of Australians and throughout the world really, women who are told that their child will have Down’s Syndrome early in pregnancy will decide to terminate the pregnancy.
Talk about trying to have it both ways!
He should be honest. What he means is that he prefers a society in which those humans with an extra chromosome get offed in the womb. (Still, it's kind of appropriate that an advocate of animal rights would use such weasel words.)
But wait. There's more! He describes those with more severe intellectual disabilites than Down's syndrome.
PETER SINGER: Well, I think if you're talking about severe intellectual disabilities and I'm not now talking about Down’s syndrome - I'm talking about something more profound than Down’s syndrome - I think that there are people who are human beings but don't have intellectual capacities to, for example, see themselves as living a life and really to be competent to make decisions or express preferences. So I think, in a way, I would say they don't have the choices about whether to go on living that we do and I think that that means also that there is a difference in how important it is that they should go on living.
So, if they're really mentally incompetent then they should be killed -- and even if they've already been born.
Ghoulish stuff. And worse when you consider that what constitutes profound retardation is hard to pin down. Like beauty, intelligence (or lack thereof), is often in the eye of the beholder.
I, for instance, think that bolded section above is a pretty good description of most greenies I've met. (And I'm sure they'd think the same of me and my kind, too.) But I'm not seriously advocating that they be terminated. I just wanna mock them for their stupidity. It's fun, and they're askin' for it, after all.
But what happens when you say, with a straight face, that killing people is okay? There will always be zealots willing to expand the definition of who fits into the "expendable" group. If they are in power, that's sinister as all get out.
The Green Ghoul continues:
PETER SINGER: Not a lesser humanity. Well, I mean, they're all human beings but for me, you see, being a human being isn't the morally decisive thing. I mean that's just being a member of a particular species and I don't think that really cuts the moral ice. I think what does is what kind of a life you can live, whether you can, for example, make choices about your life and also, of course, whether you're capable of suffering. So if you're capable of suffering then your interest in not suffering has to be considered and given the same weight as anyone else's suffering. But your interest in continuing to live your life, I think, does relate, to some extent, to whether you can see your life as something that actually exists over time or whether you're so profoundly retarded that, though you may be able to suffer, you don't see yourself as living a life. You know perhaps you aren't even capable of a relationship with your mother or father. I think that does make a real difference.
Ugh. This guy says we're on the same level as animals. (Actually, I reckon he thinks they're above us because more often than not he's advocating their preservation, and human death.)
Just on that reference to parenthood at the end: He seems to be arguing that the judgement of whether a life is worth living can be decided by considering cumulative factors, one of which is whether you have a relationship with your mother or father.
Hmmm. Many kids of gay couples aren't capable of having a relationship with their mother or father, because they've been denied one by the couple in question. So, by his reasoning, they'd have a lesser right to life, right?
Try that argument at the next "marriage equality" march (while pointing at some of the toddlers in tow) and see how popular you are.
TONY JONES: Does that indicate or, in your system of ethics, would that bestow lesser rights upon persons with very severe disability?
PETER SINGER: A lesser right to life, I would say, not a lesser right to have suffering or to avoid suffering or to not have suffering inflicted on you. Because if you're capable of suffering, that's all that's crucial there. But in terms of a right to life I think, yes, that makes a difference.
Very contorted reasoning there. But it sounds like what he's saying is that killing people is okay if they're really dumb -- and hey, you're ending their suffering, too! Bonus!
Seems like Creepy Pete is appointing himself as judge and jury, and advocating that the state do the, er, executioner-ing.
All alamingly totalitarian from where I'm sitting. And isn't it a cack that Andrew Bolt gets slimed as a Nazi eugenicist (and for saying we should stop categorizing people racially, of all things!) whereas this guy, who wants humans to be offed if he deems them to be useless burdens, is a dinkum hero to the very people sliming Bolta as a Nazi!
How lost are these people? You couldn't get any loster if you tried.
There's more of the same from the Green Ghoul on that episode if you wanna have a look. But I suggest you keep a bucket by the sofa just in case you have to blow chunks. I know I did.