Believing we’re in God’s image, that we’re accountable to God for loving others, that death is God’s call and not ours (self-defense and just-war aside), theists easily resist a solution to chronic homelessness that, it seems, those supporting abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and suicide must logically accept: euthanize the chronically homeless (painlessly and with dignity, of course). This “solution” is no less (and no more) evil than these other types of murder, to one upholding the sacred right to life established by our Creator.
– How would a Technocrat/Eugenicist/Progressive of the early 20th Century answer (American or German)? How, to be consistent, must the population-control and sustainability crowd respond?
– Why not euthanize those perpetually suffering, with no serious hope of recovery? Shouldn’t we at least offer to assist them in suicide?
– If one apposes having children, wishing to decrease the surplus population and the global carbon footprint, isn’t this solution most worthy of consideration? Why not “abort” those unwanted and unplanned and living off one’s city?
Of course, practically no intellectual who supports abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and suicide calls for solving chronic homelessness by euthanasia. The governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam, and Peter Singer, professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, support infanticide but, to my knowledge, do not call for this. To be consistent, though, they should. Why should this surprise us? After all, their fellow travelers do support abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and suicide!