Oprah Goes Over to the Dark Side. (That is not a racial reference.) I spoke yesterday about the sado-masochistic cruelty of filmic media. Today, Oprah Winfrey joined the chorus of sado-masochists reveling in death as entertainment. She showed brutal scene after brutal scene of the monstrousness of nature in living — sorry: dying — color, in praising the Discovery Channel's new series Planet Earth. I had to turn off. You see, I don't glory in death. I'm human. Oprah? I'm not so sure anymore.
+
All filmic media, including documentaries, have been taken over by sado-masochists, who inflict death and suffering upon their audience out of a will to cause suffering. This is not education. It is violent death as entertainment. Its purpose is not simply to show us the realities of the monster we insanely call "Mother Nature", because that can be done in statements, without graphic depictions: "The arctic fox must take advantage of the short nesting season of migratory birds to eat as many chicks and store as many eggs as possible in order to survive the long arctic winter." But that's not entertaining enuf for the degenerates of film. They need to show chicks being killed, and mother geese trying desperately to save them. "That's entertainment!"
+
Oprah is, alas, not nearly as smart as a woman in her position needs to be. Today, she seemed an outrite-stupid woman, for enlisting in the Discovery Channel's sado-masochistic paean to death, as she has enlisted in the Castration Conspiracy, using her popularity to promote acceptance of "transgendered" individuals who can be saved from a cruel 'mistake' of nature by "sex-change" surgery. Oprah is part of a vast combination instigated by religious nuts and psychotic shrinks who talk confused gay men and lesbian women into believing (a) that they are abnormal, (b) that they would not be abnormal if they were the opposite gender, and (c) that they can change their gender by having surgeons slash off or sew shut what doesn't fit the gender that society says they "should" be, then having 'doctors' — who do not deserve to be called "doctors" because they revile the most basic requirement of the Hippocratic oath: above all, do no harm — pump them full of hormones at levels entirely unnatural to them, in some cases inducing cancer and early death, all so society can pretend that the only 'normal' way people can interact sexually is male-female, in which one partner must always be male and the other must always be female. To preserve that delusional and arbitrary mental construct, it doesn't matter if you have to play games with reality, surgically and chemically mutilate one of the parties and fool the other into thinking he is having sex with a woman when he's really having sex with a mutilated man. We'll just turn a blind eye to the mutilation and pretend that the homosexual sex a straight man or lesbian sex a straight woman is fooled into is heterosexual, and even issue new names and official documents testifying to the false gender "assigned" by Frankensteinian quacks who, alas, have not (yet) been killed by a mob of torchbearing Villagers.
+
There is no such thing as "a woman trapped in the body of a man" or vice-versa. No such thing. And anyone who believes himself 'really' the opposite gender of what his body plainly is, is insane. Period. Just as insane as someone who believes himself Napoleon. We do not create lunatics into sane people by dressing them like Napoleon, teaching them French, and issuing official documents that tell the whole world that they are — all of them — in fact Napoleon.
+
You are the gender you are, period. Gender is not a choice, any more than is species. Nor can gender be changed, because every cell in the human body is permanently, indelibly, unalterably stamped with either an XX chromosomal configuration (female) or XY (male), save some "intersexes", the bulk of which are retarded and otherwise defective. We're not really talking about genetic intersexes, natural if tragic accidents of nature, when we talk of "sex-reassignment surgery". We're talking about genetically normal people being chopped up and reconfigured by knife and drugs to look like something they're not.
+
It is truly grotesque that some people who want the United Nations to declare "female circumcision" a crime against humanity are silent or actually favorably disposed to "sex-change operations". When Josef Mengele castrated Jews, he was seen as a monster. When supposedly reputable surgeons in supposedly reputable hospitals castrate confused homosexuals, they are seen as humanitarians saving "transgendered" people from a life of misery in "the wrong body". No, they're just vicious, vile quacks not one whit less contemptible and monstrous than Josef Mengele. The United Nations needs to shake awake the fools in the West who have been duped into seeing castration as humanitarianism, and declare sex-change operations a crime against humanity, punishable by death.
+
You can no more change gender than you can change species. Maybe you wish you could fly like a bird, but you will never be a bird. If someone thought s/he was a refrigerator, would we make him or her into a refrigerator by surgically implanting a lite bulb at the back of their mouth?
+
If it were possible for science to use a virus to invade every single cell of a person's body and inject a new chromosome (say, X) and simultaneously kill an old chromosome (Y), then you could argue that you really have changed a person's sex. Science can't do that, not now, and probably not ever. So there is no such thing as a "sex change". Every cell lining a 'vagina' slashed into some demented faggot's crotch bears the XY marker of a man, and every cell of a make-believe 'penis' created from spare tissues elsewhere in a crazed dyke's body bears the XX marker of a woman. There is no such thing as a male vagina or female penis, never will be, never should be.
+
Instead of lying to confused gay men and lesbian women that they can be what they cannot possibly ever be — part of the insane motto of our insane and spoiled age, "You can be anything you want to be" — and helping them adjust to their reality and find happiness in it, society instead conspires to slash them to ribbons, issue false documents, and fool people around them into participating in behaviors they would never consent to if they knew what they were really doing.
+
Gender doesn't change. Species doesn't change. Not in adults. The old question "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" has an answer: the egg. The parents of the chicken were not chickens. A mutation in the offspring produced the chicken. So the only way a shift in species can occur is during reproduction.
+
It doesn't matter how "advanced" science becomes, it will never be able to make an adult human being into, for instance, a bird. And would that be an "advance"?
+
Do not for an instant think there aren't "scientists" thinking about such things. Oh, they may not be thinking of surgery on adults to change a human person into a birdperson, but there are geneticists thinking about manipulating genes to create multi-species mixes. Some scientists may think they can "improve" on the current design of the human being: "Wouldn't it be great to have two more arms to get more done? or two more legs so we could run faster and carry more weight?" Perhaps they pose the question in terms of possibility rather than purpose. "Can we create a human being with more than two arms or legs? Is that possible? Can we move bird genes into the human genome to grow wings on people? Is that possible? Let's find out!" No. Let's not.
+
I'm sure there are scientists somewhere on this planet right now thinking such things. They must never be permitted to go further than thinking or speculating. If they try, they should be killed, and any techniques they develop to tamper with the fundamental nature of the human creature should be destroyed, with clear warnings to other scientists not ever to try any such thing again, on pain of death.
+
Already we have sheep 15% of whose genes are human. Why? Because some scientist thought that would be a good thing to try. There's always some justification for scientific madness. Look at the atom bomb, then hydrogen bomb, then neutron bomb. And there's always some lunatic willing to buy into the rationalization and fund Frankensteinian "science". We are able to do things we just plain shouldn't do.

Artist Eduardo Kac stunned several hundred colleagues last month when he proposed using genetic engineering to create a dog with fluorescent fur.

And what is his justification for that outlandish proposal? "Art".

Kac's work [already done with other animals] is based on recent scientific developments. Scientists at Stanford University, for example, have been creating mice and rats that glow since 1995.

Led by Professor of pediatrics Christopher Contag, the Stanford scientists discovered how to take the gene that causes fireflies to emit a faint yellow glow and splice this gene into the tumor cells of experimental animals.

As the tumor grows, so does this yellow glow that a camera can detect through the skin of the lab animal. Contag designed the process to see how tumors responded to drug treatments without having to kill the lab animals and study their remains. If a test drug shrinks a glowing tumor, the result would be visible through the rodent's skin ... which could lead to faster and cheaper drug testing and spare a lot of lab animals' lives.

So the scientists' rationale is "science", "medical progress", "spar[ing] a lot of lab animals' lives".
+
How far will rationalization after rationalization for steps further and further into a world of interspecies freaks take us if society imposes no restrictions? Well, let's think how some geneticist might feel s/he could "improve" on the design of the human creature.
+
With Global Warming, the seas are bound to rise, flooding ever larger parts of the continents, right? Maybe we could give gills and flippers to future generations of coastal peoples, in addition to arms and lungs — or instead of arms and lungs, in a new Waterworld. Maybe we could create flippers that end in hands, so we could do everything a dolphin can but also everything a person can. Wouldn't that be grrrrreat!?
+
An inventive mind is not necessarily a benign or stable mind. And the march of scientific progress is not beyond our control. Legal standards and rigid prohibitions can and must be set by society, lest "science" become a nitemare and create a world filled with monstrosities of human invention. The ultimate control society has over things going that seriously wrong is control over the most basic of genetic materials, the body: we can impose death upon the offending individual organisms, the Frankensteins among us. Let us treat them as they would treat others, as our property, and chop them up for parts for sane people. How can they complain?
+
It's bad enuf when they mutilate people who have been psychologically tormented and manipulated into consenting to mutilation. But it would be even worse if "scientists" are permitted to inflict unnatural conditions upon not just puppies and kittens, but also human babies without their consent. There really are 'people' who would deliberately create babies with flippers and gills, with no thought to whether the babies would want such things for themselves.
+
Sensible forms of gene therapy for medical progress do in some measure approach tampering with the fundamental genetics of the human creature, and some gene therapy is sane and morally permissible. But the mere fact that some genetic intervention is defensible does not mean that we must stand aside and let all genetic alterations pass. We can and must draw a line in the sand: this far and no farther. And we can't put this off for some indefinite future someday, because fertile minds are hatching insane plans right now, and the technology to flesh out those plans is being developed very fast.
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is — for Israel.)




- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 6:25 PM