Archive for January 16th, 2006
Genetic Morality is THE Theme of the Twenty-First Century
Posted by Bob in Coaching Session, How Things Work on 01/16/2006
Elizabeth has pointed out that social scientists HATE science.
As Joe points out, Marxists and social scientists in general consider genetics to be the ultimate enemy. When it comes to nature versus burture, the simple fact is that social science IS nurture.
The whole concept of “rule by the intellectuals” is based on the idea that the ideal society will be realized when we have true communism or the right education or sociology or psychology or diversity applied throughout the world.
The problem with this is NOT that it is intellectually incorrect. The problem is that it’s SILLY.
And you cannot deal with something that is silly as if it were a real point of view.
There is absolutely nothing new about this situation. A glaring example of this exact situation may be found in the top medical experts of the year 1800.
What has happened to all the University Medical professors who insisted on Galen’s HUmor Theory and said that bleeding was the cure to most diseases?
What has happened to the entire Established Church clergy in London that denounced Jenner’s vaccinations against smallpox as Violations of the Law of Jehovah?
Did we come to some kind of William Buckley/respectable cosnervative accommodation with them which showed respect for their point of view, so that we now a medicine that is part HUmor Theory and part germ theory?
That would be insane.
The university doctors had to face the fact that they were teaching murderoous rot. The preachers had to face the fact that introducing cow disease into a human being was the right thing to do.
There was NO compromise. Due respect was given to their “point of view.”
None. In this century, genetic morality is not going to be ***A*** question. Genetic morality is going to be ***THE*** question.
People will have the choice of giving their children better genes with no quotes around the word better, or they are going to produce children who will curse them in their graves.
If any of us were making the choice for ourselves, everyone of us has genetic traits he would like to be improved. Everybody would like the congenital conditions we have suffered, in my case depression, taken out. We would all like to be smarter and better looking.
That is what I would do for ME if I had to make the choice.
But if there is one thing that Father Flannerty and all the other churchmen agree with sociology professor GoldBottom about it is that this “improvement” in the genes of our descendants is the very essence of Evil.
It is, always, Hitlerism.
So according to all our established religions The Golden Rule applies to environment but not to heredity.
The science of genetics is advancing. Soon science will produce a stark choice between the Golden Rule and acting like heredity isn’t there, which is the doctrine of both the old and the new established religions.
So all the moralists will be pounding their Old Testaments and their Papal Encyclicals and their sociology textbooks and screaming that True Morality means prodeucing “natural” offspring.
And as this comes about, most people, including most of the readers of this blog, will think it’s something new.
If one has any historical perspective at all, there is nothing new about.
In 1790 most SURVIVING people were walking around with smallpox scars, including George Washington. George Washington’s highly qualified physicians bled him to death in 1799 by taking QUARTS of blood out of him to cure his pneumonia.
In fact, even many of the smallpox survivors were not walking around with their scars. Many had been made feeble-minded and had to stay at home. Many were so horribly scarred that they did not walk abroad.
So Jenner found that if you put some cowpox into a person he would be immune to smallpox.
Every pulpit in London resounded with a unanimous denunciation of Jenner’s vaccination. It was a violation of the Law of Jehovah to put a cow disease into the sacred veins of a human being. The human body was “The Temple of God.”
Smallpox, shouted the established religion of that day, was better than cowpox. Smallpox, they declared unanimously and shamelessly, was Nature’s Way.
In exactly the same way our established religions will screaming that I have no right to take dpression out of my children’s genes. They will shout that depression is better than violating the sacred genes nature gives us randomly.
Having lived with depression, I know that damned well isn’t so. And I would take the tiny rash of cowpox any day over a bout with smallpox.
If I don’t want to live with depression, the Golden Rule tells me my children don’t want to live with depression.
And you have no right to foist dumb people on my descendants, people who will be naked and need clothing and hungry people who will need feeding. You feed them and clothe them by making them genetically capable of doing that for themselves.
Genetic morality is the Golden Rule.
After two thousand years of ignoring and violating genetic reality, Western Civilization is about to run into it head-on.
The History of our Genetic Immorality
Some people genuinely do not understand what I mean by “genetic morality.” It is a totally alien concept to all our philosophies. All of our moralities act as if genes didn’t exist AT ALL.
Even the churchmen who condemned him admitted that Origen was one of the most learned theologians of early Christianity. After learning the theology of the early church, Origen castrated himself. To him, this was the matural conclusion of the mixture of Christianity and degenerate Zoroastrianism that was early church doctrine.
You can accuseme of not understanding early church doctrine, but you cannot accuse Origen of that. The Church condemned him for actually castrating himself, but the early church was entirely in favor of the same result.
When I quoted Saint Paul as saying that unmarried women ideally should not have sex ever, but if they MUST have sex, then it is better to marry than to burn, the response from commenters was that this was a counsel of moderation.
When people start saying things like THAT with all seriousness, I retreat. If one cannot understand Saint Paul as seeing sterility as the ideal, as Origen did, then the idea of a genetic morality is a completely alien concept.
Once again, none of this is the fault of the Old Testament, and my testimony is a rare compliment to that book on my part. Whatever you may accuse Jehovah of, genetic suicide is not one of them.
To repeat, ALL of this sterility as an ideal comes from the major religion of the time in which Christianity grew up. a religion history has conveniently forgotten completely. That was Zoraostrianism, the official faith of the entire Parthian Empire, which was large and powerful as that of Rome until its collapse seven hundred years after Christianity began.
It is from Zoroastrianism, and nowhere else, that we got our ideal of self-castration and death.
After reading this, everybody will keep asking where our civilization got its death-wish.
Which is a lot like the Jews still waiting around for a Messiah, while Jesus is recognized by both Christians and Islam.
What do you about people you GIVE the answer to, but who insist on repeating the question as if you hadn’t SAID anything?
-
You are currently browsing the archives for Monday, January 16th, 2006
Bob’s Books
Bob's first book - 1976
A Plague On Both Your HousesBob's second book - 1982
THE NEW RIGHT PAPERSBob's deadliest book - 2004
Why Johnny Can't Think:
America's Professor-PriesthoodWhy Johnny Can't Think ebook zip
pwrd: Phu=9Ad5
Joe on Genetic Morality
Posted by Bob in Comment Responses on 01/16/2006
Joe read my piece below and gave it some thought.
He wanted to comment on it and he began by saying, “How will I put this?”
He answered his own question well enough so that I insert his whole comment below as part of my own Blog:
“How can I put this? The people who raised me were born in 1888 and 1895 respectively. They were good people. Germans. They talked about something called “stock” all the time. I didn’t really understand what they were talking about until later in life but there were certain implications that I think I understood. They did their best to raise me. I learned to love them. Still do. At least the memory. Nobody ever talked about the environment. A good many years later, after I left that home and had a heap of experiences, I managed to slip in a college door somewhere. That’s when I learned that environment was everything. I studied it, believed it, lived it and only many years later discovered that it was a confidence game. While I was a Marxist I didn’t know it was a confidence game. It all seemed to make sense to me. My circumstances were such that it made sense to me that it should make sense to me. Their game is much more concentrated and consistent than the “Christians” game. The “Christians” game only gets played for a couple of hours a week. The Marxist game gets played every day all day long. That’s the way it seemed to me anyway. Gives a certain purpose to life that the preachers can’t give. Till you find out it’s a con game. Then I began to understand the importance that genes plays in the life of a person. The Marxists I dealt with did mention genetics in passing but it was always at the bottom of the list of factors influencing human behaviour. In later years, as I became an older and more experienced man, I decided to put genetics on the top of the list as opposed to the bottom of the list where the Marxists had placefd it. This, too, is simple. But it requires the courage to see it and, perhaps, proclaim it or at least allege it. In the final analysis, they’re not going to get away from the truth of genetics. It’s a confidence game that is pretty easy to see through and the evidence for it is everywhere. ”
Comment by joe rorke — 1/15/2006 @ 8:40 pm | Edit This
1 Comment