Natural Selection and Logic
I’m sure that this makes sense to someone. Perhaps we can get Al Gore’s opinion. Or maybe we could get Paris Hilton to weigh in. I’m sure she would make as astute an opinion as Herr Albrecht. Actually, Mr. Albrecht should be commended for voicing his opinions. Far too many on the left will share his views that humankind should not intervene in nature but when it comes time to pay the piper suddenly lose their moral wallet.
His statements are that the cub would have died in nature because the mother abandoned it. Therefore, the Berlin zoo should kill the cub mercifully. Let’s carry this argument of natural selection to its logical conclusion. If an animal, like a polar bear cub, is abandoned, humans should not try to save the animal because nature would want it that way. I suppose that this would apply to dogs, cats, snow seals, every animal in fact. But I don’t want to use cute and cuddly polar bears as an example so I choose to use humans.
Lets say that a single woman raises a couple of kids to age 18. At that point, she throws the kids out because she can no longer afford to pay their living expenses. You know, cell phone bills, car insurance, etc. These kids have been abandoned. Technically they are adults. They can vote and buy cigarettes but they can’t get drunk. Incidentally, they should give a free shot to voters so that they can start drowning their sorrows after facing bad and worse decisions.
So by the laws of natural selection touted by the leftwingers, these kids should be left to fend for themselves. No welfare, no assistance, no food stamps, nothing. They should be allowed to survive only if their resourcefulness gains them a job and they contribute to society. Therein is the problem for leftistas. Whenever you attempt to apply logic to their agenda, it falls apart on self-contradiction. That I understand.
His statements are that the cub would have died in nature because the mother abandoned it. Therefore, the Berlin zoo should kill the cub mercifully. Let’s carry this argument of natural selection to its logical conclusion. If an animal, like a polar bear cub, is abandoned, humans should not try to save the animal because nature would want it that way. I suppose that this would apply to dogs, cats, snow seals, every animal in fact. But I don’t want to use cute and cuddly polar bears as an example so I choose to use humans.
Lets say that a single woman raises a couple of kids to age 18. At that point, she throws the kids out because she can no longer afford to pay their living expenses. You know, cell phone bills, car insurance, etc. These kids have been abandoned. Technically they are adults. They can vote and buy cigarettes but they can’t get drunk. Incidentally, they should give a free shot to voters so that they can start drowning their sorrows after facing bad and worse decisions.
So by the laws of natural selection touted by the leftwingers, these kids should be left to fend for themselves. No welfare, no assistance, no food stamps, nothing. They should be allowed to survive only if their resourcefulness gains them a job and they contribute to society. Therein is the problem for leftistas. Whenever you attempt to apply logic to their agenda, it falls apart on self-contradiction. That I understand.
Labels: Politics
posted by Moneyman at 10:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home