Stan_Lite
24-08-2007, 15:14
Just been reading through The Times from Tuesday and read a fascinating piece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/mick_hume/article2295752.ece) by Mick Hume about the "eco-warriors" currently making nuisances of themselves at Heathrow.
I particularly liked this paragraph:
Once, when I debated these issues with George Monbiot, a leading green writer, he declared that they had to take action for the sake of “the unborn”. I pointed out that this apparently democratic mandate amounted to signing themselves a blank cheque to do as they see fit, since the unborn were hardly in a position to disagree or vote them down from the moral high ground.
It's very rare I read a newspaper article with which I agree so wholeheartedly (actually, it's very rare I read a newspaper but that's beside the point). I agree entirely with Mr Hume's stance on this matter. These people have taken it upon themselves to cause a disturbance and have the cheek to claim they're doing it in the name of the "voiceless", i.e. the developing world and the "unborn", two groups of people from whom they could not (and probably would not) receive a mandate.
What sort of self righteous egotists are these that they think they can protest in the name of groups with whom the vast majority of them have never had any contact.
Abuse, I call it.
I particularly liked this paragraph:
Once, when I debated these issues with George Monbiot, a leading green writer, he declared that they had to take action for the sake of “the unborn”. I pointed out that this apparently democratic mandate amounted to signing themselves a blank cheque to do as they see fit, since the unborn were hardly in a position to disagree or vote them down from the moral high ground.
It's very rare I read a newspaper article with which I agree so wholeheartedly (actually, it's very rare I read a newspaper but that's beside the point). I agree entirely with Mr Hume's stance on this matter. These people have taken it upon themselves to cause a disturbance and have the cheek to claim they're doing it in the name of the "voiceless", i.e. the developing world and the "unborn", two groups of people from whom they could not (and probably would not) receive a mandate.
What sort of self righteous egotists are these that they think they can protest in the name of groups with whom the vast majority of them have never had any contact.
Abuse, I call it.