Did I ever tell you about Abraham Lincoln and how many legs a dog has? Oh yes, that was last week, wasn't it? (Here We Go Again.) (1) Well, my point in that discussion was that all sorts of weird things could follow the "monkeying" with birth certificates. Well, weird has struck.
The latest skirmish in the cultural wars is over sex. Not that kind, and not even sexual identity. The latest "shot fired across the bow" is a family demanding that the birth certificate of their child NOT identify the infant as a male or female. They want to wait until the child "is able to decide for him/her/itself what sex to claim. (Note to parents: And who is the infant, here? Check out a third grade "sex ed" text and the difference is apparent–even to parents.) (Sorry, could not resist.)
Since we are addressing cultural wars, it seems appropriate to include the concept of "science deniers." One aspect of society claims to understand the origins of everything, and particularly homo sapiens. They further presume to totally fathom climate and global patterns and have pronounced that the earth is being assaulted with increasing temperatures as a direct result of human activity. (Previously discussed–and debunked.)
The salient point in their arguments and accusations is that those who disagree with them are "science deniers." The implication is that this favored segment of the race is blessed with superior intellect and comprehension of all things and, to borrow a phrase from science fiction, the Borg, "Resistance is futile."
What is so totally ironic, or can we go so far as to characterize this mind set as "asinine,"(?) is that the real science is not on their side. Take our current issues for instance. Biologically, it is impossible for two persons, well, specifically, women, to gestate the same offspring. One baby has one mother. I guess if we get really wild and conceive the child in one woman, then transplant the fertilized ovum to a second who carries it to birth, a murky claim to dual motherhood may be sustained. But biologically, the "egg donor" is technically the mother for genetic purposes.
Recall the definition posited in our previous consideration. The birth certificate is a record of live birth and of the two contributing entities from which the offspring was derived. It is not a social construct by which activists of any stripe may placard any divergent or aberrant belief or comment.
Our current "case" involves another such declaration of, frankly, the denial of science. Even in some "undefined" children who possess the external genitalia of both sexes, a DNA determination will definitively determine the facts. So to leave the question unanswered is both senseless and in denial of facts. (Look up the definition of "asinine" for some more synonyms.)
Our society is becoming increasingly confused. This lack of absolute values is infecting almost every aspect of the individual, family, community, nation, and even world perceptions.
Perhaps the earlier reference to the Borg was not tangential. A collective conscience and objective seems to be emerging where the rights and even the existence of the individual is subject and subordinate to the "hive."
Is a "simple" dispute over the information inserted into a birth certificate that earth shattering? If the intention is to preserve and convey information, data, it is not. Other resources are available. But if the intent is reform and restructure both world view and the resulting society, then, yes it is critically essential to move the collective understanding in this direction. (Pun intended.)
Alexander Hamilton is credited with stating, "If you stand for nothing, you will fall for everything." (Variously, something," "anything," or "everything.") (Think that is one reason for wanting to take him off the five spot?) That seems to summarize the question for us. What do we, and what will we, stand for? And both senses of the phrase are applicable.
We need Superman to help us "Stand for Truth, Justice, and the American way." Fill out the birth certificate
No comments:
Post a Comment