This TV ad takes the cake. Have you seen it? It is paid for by an organization that calls itself “Alliance for Life” (Ontario). It is a “provincial coordinating organization” of some 44 affiliates which, surprise surprise, includes seven Christian denominations, of which, another shocker, five are Catholic. Most interesting is an organization calling itself the “Population Research Institute”, founded of course by a priest, Father Paul Marx. Its mission? “...to expose the myth of overpopulation, to expose human rights abuses committed in population control programs.”
The Alliance, meanwhile, claims to present “a united voice for the dignity and worth of all human beings from conception/fertilization to natural death.” I can personally attest to the kind of dignity in death to which they are referring. My brother writhed in agony for months from terminal cancer, and repeatedly indicated that he wanted to die. But his Christian fundamentalist doctor was too concerned with his dignity to assist him in executing his wishes, and so my brother was forced to suffer without the ability to swallow or control his bowels. This conduct is sanctioned by the Alliance for “Life” as “morally and ethically acceptable”.
And of course, the Criminal Code, built on this kind of “morality”, stands behind them. This is the cultural “heritage” which some Canadian anti-immigrationists are intent upon saving. They are the people who grasp at environmental reasons for limiting immigration, but then turn around and advocate more birth incentives for native-born Canadians, most of whom are self-described Christians. Their objective is an ancient one. “Grow the tribe and screw carrying capacity.” So how does the Alliance for Life present its case on television?
The ad features children playing, when in a stroke, one in four of them vanish from the screen. This is to simulate the number of “children” or “babies” destroyed since the abortion law was struck down in 1988. That’s right. After 20 years the Christian right still doesn’t get it. They don’t understand the difference between a baby and a foetus. Between a life and a potential life. I once bought a lottery ticket, and I discovered that there was a substantial difference between a ticket that had the potential of winning the jackpot and one that actually did. It only took one purchase for me to figure that out. But then my learning curve is rather shorter and higher than a Bible-thumper’s I think.
But the Alliance for “Life” , or more aptly, the Alliance for the Increased Quantity of Life (rather than Quality of Life) is animated by different logic. They claim that since one-quarter of all pregnancies were terminated in Canada since the abortion law was passed, young Canadians are “missing” 3 million of their friends. Think of what a difference they would have made, they ask. Over to you Julian Simon. Another Sydney Crosby, or 100 cancer researchers, or 10,000 teachers perhaps. Forget the extra criminals, dead beats and real estate speculators. The more “life” we have the better. After all, “people” are our greatest resource.
Yeah sure. But each Canadian member of that “resource” emits, on average, 23 metric tonnes of green house gas (GHG), consumes 3 million tons of metals, minerals and fuel per year, and produces more than 150 pounds of waste annually as well. So what would those 3 million “missing” friends bring us? For starters, about 65% more GHG emissions than the tar sands produce, and about half the farmland that has been developed to accommodate the New Canadians that have arrived since the abortion law was enacted. And let us not forget the number of non-human species that would have been obliterated by the bulldozer to clear the way. Do you still miss those 3 million potential consumers now?
Each extra Canadian, whether he or she enters the country through the hospital or through the airport, diminishes the per capita share of non-renewable resources that existing Canadians enjoy. Even if the extra 3 million would have spurred more economic growth---a proposition refuted by two or three studies so far---that growth is still contingent on the supply of cheap fossil fuel and rapidly scarce minerals and metals upon which an industrial economy depends. More people does not mean a higher per capita GDP, and even if it did, the economic foundation upon which our inflated population rests is built on quicksand. The bigger we are, the harder we’ll fall. Triple digit oil will kill our transportation system and our ability to grow, harvest, transport and refrigerate our food. If we continue to grow our economy and grow our population, many more of us will starve, freeze and die, along with the flora and fauna we take down with us.
What is really required is an advertisement showing the number of various species on a screen, and those that disappear with each increment of the human population. Christians are fond of justifying the Biblical mandate for humans to exercise dominion over all God’s creatures by stressing our obligation to be wise stewards. That is a difficult task when the human population, to Catholic and evangelical cheerleading, has nearly tripled its size in my lifetime and is shrinking wildlife habitat relentlessly and mercilessly. Whether a primate’s life begins at conception or not, there are now fewer primates in existence than there are human beings born in any given day. If each one of God’s 214,000 miracles born each day is precious, what of the tens or hundreds of thousands of non human life forms that are murdered that day by our expansion? Yes, 100 species are lost each day. But many more life forms are killed than that each day. How many? Who knows? Each and every day we are breeding our life support system into the ground.
It is in this sense, then, that the Alliance for Life is the Alliance for Death.
Tim Murray
December 26/09
PS Happy New Year to Canada’s greatest and most effective environmentalist, Dr. Henry Morgenthaler.
Comments
Vivienne (not verified)
Mon, 2009-12-28 11:35
Permalink
The moral high-ground on pro-life is imbalanced
Sheila Newman
Mon, 2009-12-28 13:43
Permalink
God and nature
Peter Bright
Mon, 2009-12-28 19:07
Permalink
Nature and God
Tigerquoll
Mon, 2009-12-28 20:54
Permalink
Trust in Nature is more ethical than trust in religion
Trust in the rights and rules of Nature have a stronger moral base than beliefs in man-made religions. The nature-based beliefs of traditional peoples are premised on healthy respect for nature and all living things. Many ancient belief systems which evolved over eons sought a greater understanding of the natural world and humanity’s place in it. It sought harmony and spiritual calm. Since humanity started dominating the natural world and extended understanding to control, humanity has lost a real and spiritual connection with the natural world. Humanity’s world has become that designed and controlled by humanity which is artificial and unnatural – that is religion. This has lead to artificial and unnatural thinking and acts. In my view humanity in a human controlled and guided world separated from Nature is spiritually lost.
Religions which disrespect the rights of others to have differing views and faiths are themselves disrespectful, self-centred, greedy and immoral. Christianity has unjustly and selfishly displaced traditional faiths of local peoples. In so doing it has become a form of colonisation. It has caused wars. It has not apologised nor offered to redeem lands and lives taken. Christianity has possibly caused more harm than any other faith and so is an immoral, selfish and prejudiced faith. Christianity has been an excuse to usurp power and influence by one group of people over another, typically by force and killing.
Human religions are just different manifestations of a group of like minded people with a common cause seeking to imposed themselves and will and orthodoxy upon others. It presupposes that the dominating or invading faith has more rights and legitimacy than the invaded faith. But how is conquest by force ever a moral act?
The dogma of Anglicans or Catholics or Jews or Hindus or Buddhists or Muslims may argue in their own head that they each are respectively superior that the other, much like sports teams. The Hindu caste system is prejudiced on ethnicity. To extend such thinking to imposing will over others is invasive, unjust and immoral. It is a spiritual form of greed, superiority and control over others.
Practitioners of religion are continually being found to be morally corrupt - Catholic priests in Australia and Ireland seem to be the most immoral. The Muslim concept of 'fatwa' or 'holy war' should be an oxymoron.
In Australia, Christmas Day is entertainment for children, time off work for relaxation, time for family and friends, festivities, and to reflect on life. But Christmas has been exploited by the retail industry and bank credit cards. What religion openly challenges this immoral exploitation?
Religion is no more than one group of people seeking control and influence over others using fear and intimidation.
The Christian Bible was written by followers of the Christian faith to evangelise their message to supplant other world beliefs with their own, to increase membership and with that to acquire more power an influence.
Quoting from the Bible is no different from quoting a recipe book that claims only one way to cook. Christianity has become a form of colonisation. It has selfishly displaced traditional faiths of local peoples. It has caused wars. In so doing Christianity is an immoral selfish and prejudiced faith that has possibly caused more harm than any other faith.
Religions that discount other faiths are prejudiced and ignorant. Freedom of speech is a democratic right, so any religion that treats criticism of its interpretations as blasphemous is ignorant and immoral.
The Qur'an is the Muslim book of divine guidance and direction. It claims to exhort what is morally right and wrong. But how can any moral code accept quotes like:
"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)
"Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:103-)
"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)
"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-)
For any group to impose their wishes on another group is a form of intimidation and dominance with is illegitimate.
In Australia, Christmas Day is entertainment for children, time off work for relaxation, time for family and friends, festivities, and to reflect on life. But Christmas has been exploited by the retail industry and bank credit cards. What religion openly challenges this immoral exploitation?
What Christian value on that day is held for the indigenous peoples of Australia that typically remain disenfranchised, without the turkey or what it stands for?
The Salvation Army is one of the few religious-based cause committed to tangible altruistic care for the needy at this time. But are they doing the work of what our governments should be doing - providing for the needy in our society?
Examine the history of traditional peoples and compare these with those dominated by religion and compare the moral record and judge which has more merit and a respectful guide for human understanding, spirituality, salvation, lore and behaviour.
Tiger Quoll
Snowy River 3885
Australia
Peter Bright
Tue, 2009-12-29 08:27
Permalink
Reality
Vivienne (not verified)
Tue, 2009-12-29 09:52
Permalink
Religion is Man's bumbling response to God!
Add comment