I thought Singer had been saying stuff like this for years.  But don’t diss his reasoning as inconsistent or stupid.  Insane, yes.  But his reasoning is exactly what environmentalism has been for years: genocide.

The environmentalists have been talking about reducing human impact on the environment, pretending they are only talking about this technology or that - cars, in particular.  But the only way to reduce human impact is to reduce the number of humans.

Because, in their reasoning, all human impact on the environment is harmful, we are morally obligated to eliminate all impact by eliminating humanity.

The environmentalists have no where else to go with their moral reasoning.  Singer’s only one of the early ones to state openly that they want to kill us all.

Regards,

Andrew Wolfe

Maybe we would die of boredom because there were no football games to watch on TV.

Actually, Andrew, one way to reduce human impact is through careful regulation and technology. Notice that I wrote *careful* regulation, not scattershot regulation. Our rivers and air are far cleaner than they were several decades ago—and the Gulf of Mexico would be pretty clean now if the people in charge of enforcing regulations had actually done so.

I don’t pay attention to Singer, and I don’t think anyone else should, either. A lot of these people act like teenagers, saying crazy things only because (a) it’s consistent with their unrealistic assumptions about the world, and (b) it gets attention.

In other words, “Don’t feed the trolls!”

Does Singer write a regular column? 

I was shocked and amazed that my local newspaper had a column by him in yesterday’s newspaper. The column was about “Synthia” the new synthetic life form.

That is what Singer and animal rights activists are.  They are enemies of the human race.  They are the speakers of the anti-christian movement.  He once said “If animal rights is going to win, we have to destroy the Judeo-Christian tradition”.  That is why I believe that any person that donates money to Peta and HSUS should repent and confess, or be excomunicated.

During a debate with Singer at Princeton U. Fr.Neuhaus complimented him for his decision to have his mother (?)given extraordinary medical care to prolong her life. Singer was outraged, and the audience (students-go figure) booed him. The guy is a hypocrite, he preaches one thing for other people and then does exactly the opposite when it’s his own family that’s at stake. How did he ever get to be the professional Ethicist at a major university? This isn’t academic freedom, it’s lunacy, and it’s evil.

Jim:  I’m confused - did the audience boo Fr. Neuhaus or Singer?
Jack P.:  I think it’s a colossal mistake to ignore Singer and those like him.

The suspicion I have of extreme environmentalism aside, this is the “diet without exercising and lose weight without dieting” mentality. it simply doesn’t work. Seeking results that tend toward pleasure while reducing all responsibility. “We can’t possibly have our fun without negative results on others, so let’s eliminate the others. Better yet, let’s just not afford them the inconvenience of being around us. Yes, I would be an inconvenience to them because my will would impose penalties on them, so I’ll keep them from being conceived.” What’s wrong with this picture? If I’m going to be an inconvenience, shouldn’t I be the one to pay the penalty?  The ultimate end of nihilism is thus not so much to see one’s own existence as meaningless as to see another’s existence (or would-be existence) as meaningless, so that I may make the most of my meaningless existence. Nihilism is nor some selfless disinterest in one’s life, it is an attempt to excuse one’s guilt and dismiss one’s duties. As Bl. Mother Theresa said, “it is a poverty to decide that a child must die (or not be conceived) so that you may live as you wish.” It is also rather interesting that he tries to make sterilization. And related practices seem altruistic, so as not to burden others, but that is only a surface cover. There wouldn’t be a burden to others at all if people would live as they ought, and so it’s really just selfishness with false charity masquerading as altruism. Still, it represents a shift in emphasis from seeing a baby as inconvenient to seeing oneself as helplessly inconvenient. If he can convince others to think this way, flawed as this thinking is, it could sadly give the contraceptive mentality a major boost.

We can all derive, straight from the horse’s mouth, that there is something terribly wrong with Pete Singer and his ideology.  My question is, what is wrong with Princeton University?  How many students leave this “prestigious” university embracing this mindset?  What happens to a nation when we accept, as educators of the future generation, those who spout evil and error and call it education?  Who decided that Pete Singer would be such a valuable asset to the university that they would give him a chair in bioethics?  What is wrong with Princeton University?

Europe is doing a great job of self=extinction, by not having children.  Too bad other ethnic groups coming in like to have children; it ruined their plan!

That is why I believe that any person that donates money to Peta and HSUS should repent and confess, or be excomunicated.

God save us from do-it-yourself bishops passing mass judgment on thousands of people about whom they know nothing whatsoever.

I think it’s a colossal mistake to ignore Singer and those like him

Amen.  The man is not a combox troll.  He is a highly honored academic widely regarded by those in the commanding heights of media and culture as a Guide for the Masses.  We would be fools to ignore him.

The “intellectual” liberal mind is abnormally drawn to death. You see it every time they attempt to spread their enlightened insanity. Death is like a magnet that attracts the warped minds of people who have lost all connection to normal thinking. The elitist and soulless fantasy world known as academia is the factory that produces disturbed, progressive intellectuals. Only in this insulated bubble is a person continually encouraged to equate nihilism with intelligence. From this abnormal laboratory come abnormal ideas. Even where suffering is experienced at its worst, people do not think like nihilists because nihilism requires a certain synthetic and sterile environment, disconnected from reality. Now that the most intelligent among us have successfully murdered God, they can fulfill their atheistic dreams and exterminate the human race without remorse. So smart. And twisted. The modern university is the enemy of America, of the Catholic Church, and of mankind. Does an Ivy League education offer any value at all to the world?

LET THE WICKED CONTINUE IN THEIR WICKED WAYS, THE DEPRAVED IN THEIR DEPRAVITY! THE VIRTUOUS MUST LIVE ON IN THEIR VIRTUE AND THE HOLY ONES IN THEIR HOLINESS. Rev 22:11 (God pursues His design whatever man may do.) Another hopeful message from Revelation.

Of course none of this “guilt” ever stopped Peter Singer from having children himself.

The column is appalling, but, in fairness, his last paragraph began, “I do think it would be wrong to choose the non-sentient universe. In my judgment, for most people, life is worth living.”  Of course, he doesn’t specifiy “morally wrong”.

Therese: They were booing Neuhaus. It’s just incredible to me that a university, a training ground for our future generations, could tolerate a guy like Singer.

*That is what Singer and animal rights activists are.  They are enemies of the human race.* 

We contribute to the Humane Society. We also support foster children in India with PIME, and other similar charities in the US.

So?

I agree with Jack P. He must be opposed, but the opposition will never get a fair hearing in academic circles. He, and others like him, must be fought in our Churches, in our families,in the media-like Nation Catholic Register-and the entertainment media. The battle will be won or lost there.

In fairness to Dr Singer (and, believe me, I’m no fan of his), the musings that Mark has excerpt here are basically a thought experiment, not his actual convictions. He, like most people, like conservative Catholics, would prefer that future generations exist.

Kind of like how Darwin’s and Marx’s and Nietzsche’s musings were basically just thought experiments, too? Er until, that is, they took root in various homicidal cultures and led to the extinction of tens of millions of human beings.

Ideas have consequences.

I have heard it said that on his deathbed one of the last things Joseph Stalin did was shake his fist at the sky.

When Mr. Singer’s last hour comes, I think we shall see what it is he truly believes.

This is an out-of-context quote.  If you click through to Singer’s article, you will see that the passage quoted above is opinion that Singer examines, weighs, and then rejects.

I utterly disagree with Singer’s actual views.  But this is not one of his actual views.

Rememberthe people in California years ago..who sold and gave away everything and followed their leader out onto the desert ?..And none of them were ever seen again..? A space ship was supposed to pick them up.
Well..Here we go, again…Of course this is nonsense..! Read G.K. Chesterton and get your heads straight. Don’t we have enough reality based problems to keep us busy ? “What fools we mortals be ” ! (Puck)

The technology required for mass sterilization has been around for a long time, Mia, and is a reality for people in places like China.

Well..of course..BUT Stop giving them attention..and kick their A***s and go on…Stop buying in..!

I totally wrote a story after reading too much Walker Percy (it was The Thanatos Syndrome I’d just finished) where the world’s governments decided to do basically what Singer just suggested would be okay, minus the party and plus a couple of generations for phasing. The story kind of sucked. But it makes me very happy that Singer is now defending the idea of exterminating our race by sterilization.

It makes me happy to know that you are happy about it. May I assist you..? Sterilization is messy..and takes too long…I have a .357 magnum that talks straight in my hand..so do let me know when I can be of help. Or better still..bring your money with you. I have a space ship…

Mia, you are now my new favorite commenter, and I mean that in the most non-ironically way possible. Awesome.

I know how awesome I am…Lets Dance..!

Sure! Put on your red dress and dance the blues. And lest anyone think this thread has gone off-topic… Peter Singer!

I think we should all pray for Pete Singer’s soul.

Agreed. My family and I will include him in our prayers and fasting.

“any person that donates money to Peta and HSUS should repent and confess, or be excomunicated.”

Okay, I could maybe see where donating to PETA might be sinful, wasteful or at least stupid, given their extreme views and their attacks on people who disagree with them. But the Humane Society?

I must admit that I am perversely comforted, as a woman with disabilities, that Singer has now given me an odd sort of equality. He apparently hates ALL humanity as much as he has been shown to hate the obviously defective.