Skip to main content
Monday, February 25 2019

I am skeptical of the hysterical claims regarding the irreversible impact man is having on the global climate for a number of reasons:

  1. Those claims are consistently being made by the same people who have tried for years, in different ways and with different approaches, to usurp more power from the individual and place it in the hands of government.  Climate change strikes me as simply the newest vehicle to use in driving the same path.
  2. The claims are made by individuals who themselves refuse to make the drastic lifestyle changes they say are required to spare humanity.  If they truly believed the situation was as dire as they proclaim it to be, wouldn’t they themselves be moved to lead by example?  The fact that they won’t tells me they don’t really believe what they are saying.  So what’s their motivation in saying something they don’t believe?  I’m back to reason 1.
  3. The geologic history of Earth reveals dramatic changes in climate long before man’s industrial revolution, his use of fossil fuels, or his production of excess carbon.  The Earth – and man – has always survived those dramatic changes.  That’s why I tend to believe that if climate change is occurring we are better served spending our energies adapting and taking advantage of the changes rather than futilely imposing draconian central-planning regulations to try to stave off something we can’t stop anyway.

Still, despite my skepticism, I have really made an effort in recent times to see the people who promote the hysteria in as positive a light as I can.  I want to grant that they are acting in ways that they believe, right or wrong, are best for us as human beings.  I want to credit them for their commitment to a healthier planet, and most of all I want to praise them for their concern for future generations. 

But the unconscionable vote that occurred in the United States Senate last night has rendered that goodwill virtually impossible for me to extend.  How can I take Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Kristen Gillibrand, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, or any other Democrat in the Senate (save the three exceptions of Casey, Jones, Manchin) seriously when they pretend to weep over climate change threatening the lives of our children when they all cast a ghoulish vote against requiring doctors to save the lives of infants who survive an abortion attempt?

These aren’t “fetuses” or “clumps of cells.”  These aren’t beings inside the womb of the mother.  These aren’t potential lives still “dependent upon their host.”  These are living, breathing, human infants who survived the abortion and are crying in a hospital room and in need of medical attention.  And 44 Democrats voted against it.

It’s abominable.  And put plainly, it is morally disqualifying.  Not one of those 44 have any business being in a position of leadership, and not one of them can ever be taken seriously when it comes to their virtue-signaling over “existential threats” to our civilization.

44 Democrats lacked the moral sense to vote against infanticide last night.  If you listen to anything they ever say to you about their concern for “the children” you are at best a fool, and at worst complicit in their gaslighting defense of the murder of precious, innocent, helpless infants.

Posted by: Peter Heck AT 08:07 pm   |  Permalink   |  Email