The Value of Life

It had to happen. It was inevitable. There was no way to avoid it. In fact, it is absolutely rational ... even though it is insane.

The Swiss government put together a report on bioethics and decided that "living organisms should be considered morally for their own sake because they are alive." The conclusion they came to (I mean, I'm not drawing a logical conclusion -- it was theirs) was that "individual plants have inherent worth" and ought to be treated with care and dignity. They suggested that a farmer could mow his field, but if he casually "decapitates" some wildflowers on his way home, it was an immoral act.

And why not? In 2000, New Zealand passed a law conferring special rights to monkeys as part of the "Great Apes Project". Since some "non-human-hominids" are 98.5% human genetically, they should have 98.5% of human rights. The project would like to pass laws that would ensure that these creatures couldn't be put behind bars without a court order. Their ultimate goal is to outlaw all animal testing because, after all, animals are people, too, you know. No, they don't say that, but that is their goal.

And it's logical. Basic Point 1: There is no god. Assuming #1, Basic Point 2 says that it's obvious that all life has evolved from the same inorganic matter. The obvious conclusion can only be that all life would have the same value. Assigning higher value to humans over, say, plants would be speciesism of the worst kind. It's illogical. You religious nut jobs who argue otherwise are ... nut jobs. And you atheists that also suggest that humans should have special rights are just not thinking. It is the only possible conclusion.

I mean, seriously, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Where do we come up with this stuff? "Creator?" "Unalienable rights?" What arrogance! What nonsense!

The United States Constitution was designed to limit government because it was assumed that all humans were created by God and had rights upon which government should never infringe. The Bill of Rights that are included in the Constitution were almost not passed because it was feared that these would be thought of as the only rights we had. Thus the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Has the government operated outside of those specific powers delegated to it by the Constitution? Without a doubt. And where do those rights that the government has infringed come from? Well, we thought it was God. Thanks to modern science, the likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and the entire group I call "practical atheists", we are free of that nonsense ... so free that we're without a leg to stand on.

Maybe you think these are steps forward. Maybe you think that plants and animals ought to have the very same rights that the species we call "Man" has. I fear that, in the final analysis, this drive to apply equal value to all life on this planet will work out badly for you. It may look like you can raise the value of everything to a high point, but I suspect that the result will be the reverse. Humans will end up with the same rights as roses. It's okay to "decapitate" them whenever you feel the need.