Goal of lib­er­als: Avoid con­se­quences

The Washington Times Daily - - Opinion -

In the re­cent col­umn “Pre­med­i­tated mur­der of new­borns” (Com­men­tary, Tues­day) Rep. Christopher H. Smith, New Jer­sey Re­pub­li­can, rhetor­i­cally asks why so many who claim to be pro­po­nents of hu­man rights sys­tem­at­i­cally de­hu­man­ize and ex­clude the weak­est and most vul­ner­a­ble be­ings from le­gal pro­tec­tion.

The mys­tery of such lib­eral con­tra­dic­tions is not so baf­fling once one re­al­izes the un­der­ly­ing mo­ti­va­tion of so­cial lib­er­al­ism: to find a way around the law of nat­u­ral con­se­quences. In other words, the col­lec­tive thought seems to be, “How can we en­gi­neer so­ci­ety so that I can have my fun but not have to deal with the con­se­quences?”

This is part of so­cial lib­er­als’ nev­erend­ing quest, and it is com­pletely con­sis­tent with their other val­ues. BRENT CAREY Springfield

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.