Tuesday, January 6, 2015

Mind unbound

Joshua Alcorn’s parents did not entertain his destructive fantasies of what he was, and he killed himself, choosing to become a martyr for the cause of being whatever one believes oneself to be. The sad situation illustrates the need for correction, not the appeasement of unreality. If Joshua told them two and two was five, what then?

Carl Trueman writes at First Things:

There are people who have xenomelia and want perfectly healthy limbs amputated. Are parents who impose on their offspring the normativity of the species assigned to them at birth to be dismissed as unsupportive, unloving, and cruel? Are those who deny a child with xenomelia the right to have his arm amputated unfit to be parents? If my neighbor sincerely believes he is Napoleon trapped in the wrong body, does kindness and love mean that I have to affirm him in this belief? And if not, why not? And if bodies are out of bounds as evidence, what else can I use to make my case? I think these are legitimate questions to ask of the advocates pressing the transgender issue.

One of the great traits of many Americans is that they want to be kind and they want to be affirming. They even have a constitutional right to pursue happiness. But kindness, affirmation, and happiness only have specific meaning within a larger context, and that larger context is slowly descending into chaos.

Body and place, the tactile essences of human beingness, are subsumed to the mind. For science, technology, and relative experience empower the pathologies of imagination and self-will to transcend the limitations of the flesh.

“Transhumanists distinguish the value of human life from biology and creation, and instead place its value in human ideals and experiences. This is because values ‘come from minds.’ Since a man’s values are but the ones he chooses, opting for a new ethical paradigm would allow him to redefine all aspects of life.” –Martin Erdmann

It allows him to define life itself. Births are “planned” now, engineered to coincide with the wills of the mother and the father, if he’s lucky to have a voice in the matter. Susan Michelle Tyrrell writes:

A fetus brought to “term” is a baby—unless one chooses to kill it with abortion, in which case it’s a “choice to terminate the fetus.” If the baby is wanted, then we throw baby showers and bring gifts. In our society, the decision has been removed from science and relegated to voice, which is what our ancestors would have called quackery.

As we renounce our bodies to inhabit our minds, we commoditize flesh, which is what we experience of others in our time on earth. So the sanctity of life is sacrificed to individual prejudice. Brave New World alert!

In 2018, a new birth control implant may be available that has the same effects of some forms of oral contraception. The implant would be placed in the arm, stomach or buttocks and would release daily doses of levonorgestrel, which is the same hormone used in the Plan B morning after pill, which may cause an abortion.

The implant would be inserted at a doctor’s office and last for 16 years.

However, in contrast to current implants already on the market, this contraceptive would come with a remote control that would be used if the woman wanted to become pregnant. The Daily Mail reports that the device would come with a case that contains the chip, a battery and electronics for drug release and for wireless communication to the remote control.

These aren’t “enhancements,” they’re degradations. They don’t comport with the physical nature of man.

No comments:

Post a Comment