You are hereBlogs / defaithed's blog / Of Darwinism and death panels
Of Darwinism and death panels
Do animals have it easy?
We all know they don't. Wild creatures struggle to find enough food to survive. They're on the run for ther lives 24/7, too; every day an animal keeps out of some other creature's belly is a minor miracle. Don't forget environmental dangers and the never-ending assault by parasites and pathogens. Nature is persistent in trying to kill its children.
Don't think that plants get off easily! They compete too for space, light, and water. And just when a young shoot thinks things are going well, bam, here comes a hungry deer or a locust swarm. Microbes too: it's the same struggle against starvation, predators, and hazards.
Living things are born onto a battlefield. Most never make it to the stage of creating the next generation. It's usually the fittest that run the gauntlet that far – if they're lucky.
This is something we all know. The struggle for survival in the wild is not a "finding of science"; it's universal common knowledge, obvious to everyone with a pair of eyes. Young people and old people know it. Medieval peasants knew it. Bronze Age peoples knew it. Cavemen knew it. It's as mundane an observation as the wetness of water.
In the 19th century, Charles Darwin pointed our attention to this common knowledge. As a prelude to a groundbreaking notion of how the struggle for survival shapes differences among generations, he reminded us that wild creatures struggle to thrive and breed, and that fitter and well-adapted specimens are more likely to make it. This is what everyone already knows as common sense.
Alas. Certain zealots with religious agendas decided, for reasons only they (possibly) understand, that the notion of change over generations was an affront to their interpretations of select scriptures. Thus began the shriek:
Oh my God! "Survival of the fittest"! Darwinists want the strong to kill the weak! They want eugenics and murder!
"Oh my God", indeed. What level of stupidity – what level of pithed, triple-lobotomized, saliva-dripping idiocy – can hear "As we all see in nature, creatures struggle to survive and breed, with the fittest specimens having the best shot", and claim to understand it as "The strong among us must kill the weak!"?
Jump ahead 150 years. We know people haven't gotten a lot smarter, as the zealots are still bleating the above in between changings of their drool bibs. But at least people can't have gotten dumber, letting that idiocy leach into additional issues, right?
Alas again. Gaze upon this sad scenario:
Many people face heart-rending decisions on caring for dying, incapacitated loved ones with no hope of independence from life support. They need to undertake difficult discussions with medical and legal professionals on medical prognoses, care options, legal issues, and the patient's own wishes as outlined in a living will. These consultations are vital, but can add to what is already a staggering financial burden for the caretakers.
As the US debates its national health care policies, legislation was proposed to allow existing social medical insurance to cover the expense of such voluntary consultations. Consultations that have always been available, recommended, and undertaken as required. Consultations that help people, and that could finally become affordable for all.
Enter the zealots, this time with political and financial agendas:
Oh my God! "End-of-life consultations"! The government wants to pull the plug on grandma! They want euthanasia and 'death panels' to kill the unwanted!
That is not sarcasm. As of August, 2009, those are literally the shrieks going 'round the nation. Again, what level of insanity – what level of gibbering, voices-in-the-head, pants-wetting lunacy – can hear "Let's extend Medicare reimbursements to cover voluntary counseling on end-of-life issues", and claim to understand it as "Let's set up government death panels to kill unneeded people!"?
This is one of those times when all you can do is slap a big hand to your face and pull it down like a flabbergasted cartoon character. Or maybe bonk yourself on the head with a hammer and watch the little birdies go tweeting around.
Really, at times like this I wish we could go back in time and reboot humanity, somehow starting mankind all over again with a little more reason this time.
Oh my God! "Reboot humanity"! He wants to kill all of us, and...
Oh shut up.
The nazi's used that reasoning, only to help those who could not manage or who were a burden on the economy, you can see where it went in the end if you study their eugenics program (they learned alot from the U.S. eugenics program), what makes you think it can't happen again? do you really put that much trust in govt?
this is coming from a guy who is an atheist I am no jesus freak sweating and squirming in front of a clinic somewhere.
Do I think the US government couldn't set up eugenics "death panels"? Of course it could do so. And the State of Indiana could start requiring single mothers to wear a blue parallelogram badge on their sleeves, and a city ordinance in Daytona Beach could ban haircuts, and Rotary Clubs everywhere could demand mandatory firearm training for third-graders. Those aren't purely sarcastic; they are technically possible.
The point is, why would one believe any of those is a real risk? Where's the slightest hint of evidence for the planning of eugenics death panels? Nowhere.
Do I put a lot of trust in government? In all things? No. In some things, yes. How about a government-run health insurance program? Well, considering that the US government has been running such programs for decades, and that those programs – Medicare, veterans' care, and insurance programs for US congresspersons – are overall rated favorably, yes, I trust that the government could do a good job with the type of universal health care insurance being discussed. (Whether what comes out of the current mess will be good or not, it's getting pretty hard to say...)
Post new comment