SHAME! On all those who get young schoolchildren to demonstrate for their cause

Filed on 04 May 2019 in Food For Thought category. Print This Page

SHAME!  On all those who get young schoolchildren to demonstrate for their cause.

Particularly when there are so many differing levels of action or no action.

This is sheer manipulation of a gross kind.

Small kids crying for our world.

Raising anxiety and fear and a sense of powerlessness.



Pet Hate: manipulating kids for political purposes.

Re schoolchildren out of school protesting re climate change

PS just imagine if we organised a demonstration against abortion and told kids about ripping limb from limb in second-trimester and putting the parts together and aborting girls because we wanted a boy… and told them “oh, we’re pretty sure they don’t feel pain, but if we have to operate on them we do give them an anaesthetic”. Would they be allowed to participate? No, of course not, for that would be child abuse (but shredding a baby inside the “safe-house-womb” is not??

See below written 2006 re 100 diabetic children taken to Parliament house to lobby for destructive embryo research.

100 Children – Eugenics in our society

Juvenile Diabetes – do we “cure” or do we just prevent by elimination?

A comment on the news that 100 children were part of the group from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) lobbying at Parliament House for increased federal funding Nov 1, 2006.  As the JDRF is known to promote research on embryonic stem cellc (ESCs), was it just coincidence that they were there the week before debate on the Patterson bill to legalise cloning for ESCs?  Whether this was an overt part of the agenda is not known but certainly it will be used by pro-cloning MPs to push through the bill.

But the issue for the children is much bigger than a possible cure – which is more likely to come through research on non-embryonic sources such as adult stem cells (ASCs).

Don’t these children know they are the next discardables??

Don’t they know that PIGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) will prevent them from existing?

Don’t they know they will be eliminated at 18 weeks if PIGD fails to pick them up?

Don’t they realise they might be eliminated as babies before they become “persons” – that is, before they become “self-aware”?

Don’t they know that parents in the future will be regarded as “genetic outlaws” and “dissidents” unless they agree to such elimination?

Don’t they understand what is at stake once we start looking at relative values and who should live and who should die?

Why aren’t they scared?

Adult stem cells are their ONLY HOPE of achieving cure while maintaining that all human life is of value.

The utilitarian philosophy that espouses destructive embryo research “for the greater good of society” will lead to their elimination before cure.  Cure will be by elimination!

Have you noticed that our beautiful Down’s Syndrome people are disappearing?

Have you seen the superb publicity for people with disability – upholding the intrinsic value of all human life wonderfully?  Open Your Mind. Count us in.

Did you know there’s a waiting list for adoption of Down’s Syndrome children in the USA? Did you know there is a move in UK to eliminate autism?  Because the majority of autistic children are males the proposal is that in families with a history of autism that all males will be de-selected.

Achondroplasia (a form of dwarfism) is another “discardable”.  Don’t tell Senator Dr Alan Eggleston.

Parents in England have won the right (The West Australian 2/11/04) to select and de-select their babies according to the risk of developing bowel cancer in later life.

Where do we stop?  Do we allow selection to eliminate high cholesterols from our world?  It sounds attractive, doesn’t it?  Do we eliminate congenital deafness and what does even asking that question say about how we view the deaf in society?  Can we have a perfect world?  If the answer is ‘yes’ then surely we should also consider characteristics such as athletic ability – at least because we will have a healthier society with less consequent cost to our health system.  Will longevity be a selection criterion?  And if so will it be because we consider that living longer is an advantage to society or will we consider it undesirable because of an increased cost to society in terms of caring for our aged?  Or will we select a desirable age to live to and if so what age and what will we do with those who are threatening to live longer than that age?

Now there are very educated and persuasive voices pushing for these things.  Indeed the costs to the community of disability have been calculated and this has led to the labelling of parents who do not agree to have their babies “de-selected” as “genetic outlaws.”

So prevention by elimination – according to these voices – is better.

This is the inevitable result of the push to devalue the human embryo by cloning human life for the purpose of destructive research.

We must protect the weak and the vulnerable at all stages of existence otherwise we open the door to the discarding of human life at any stage depending on the value we attach to it.

In the field of medical science we must not sacrifice one human life for another.

All human life matters.  This is universal truth.

Lachlan Dunjey.  3 Nov 2006

Share |