Friday, July 3, 2009

A Short Rant

Back when I was writing for the original edition of The Resister I used to have a lot of fun through the process of morally kicking a number of token African columnists for various newspapers. A case in point is Derrick Z. Jackson of the Boston Globe. My lack of God! What an idiot!

In fact, given the origin of the term idiot, as a Greek term for someone who doesn’t participate in public life, Mr. Jackson would actually have to work his way up to qualify as one.

According to Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer at the Not Evil Just Wrong website Mr. Jackson has a problem with saving human lives. Specifically the lives of children in Africa.

"The use of DDT makes me shudder," Mr. Jackson said as he traveled through Uganda.

Now why would he have a problem with a substance that is known to harm only the disease carrying insects that kill his fellow Africans?

Because once upon a time ago a morally sick woman by the name of Rachel Carson told a lie. She said that DDT was killing the cute little birdies before they were hatched from their eggs.

This assertion has never been verified. But so what? Politicians who posture as "environmentally conscious" chose to ban the use of DDT as a pesticide anyway. The result is a bodycount through malaria that apparently rivals that run up by the followers of Hitler or Stalin.

If there were in fact a Dark Lord of Hell, he would have to pat the shade of Rachel Carson on the head and say, in the tone of voice used by the teachers of mentally retarded children, “GOOD JOB!”

In reality the life of a human being must have a superior moral value in any valid moral system. Even if a bunch of cute little birdies have to die so a child can live, we should not have a ethical problem with that. And anyone who does have a problem with that should not be allowed to hold any position of political authority.

But Derrick Z. Jackson is also a Socialist. Which means that the idea that a mere human being is more than an animal, and thus has a superior right to live, is shall we say, double-plus ungood to him.

What are your questions on this block of instruction?
_

No comments: