(LifeSiteNews) – Infanticide advocate Peter Singer called climate change a “life and death” issue in a recent opinion piece that commented on the latest activist trend on the left.
Climate change activists have been gluing themselves to works of art or throwing soup at them to protest what they perceive as a slow or non-existent response to their demands for as they relate to the environment.
Singer, a Princeton University bioethicist who openly supports infanticide, defended the activists.
“The title of [one of the paintings] reminds us that climate change is a life-and-death issue,” Singer wrote in Project Syndicate.
“We value art, but what we stand to lose from climate change is incomparably more significant,” Singer wrote further. “Everything we value on this planet is at stake, including the continuity of both human and non-human life.”
Singer argued that people who are really concerned about the environment should embrace this form of “civil disobedience.”
“In the absence of any such measures, eco-activists can properly claim that their non-violent civil disobedience is justified by the failure of our democracies to show sufficient concern for the interests of future generations,” Singer wrote.
His defense of human life and his concern for future generations appears at odds with his other views on the sanctity of life, as well as on “non-human life.”
Singer believes that parents should be allowed to kill their babies up to 30 days after birth. He also advocated for sex between humans and animals and specifically wants babies with disabilities to be aborted, arguing that it might be immoral not to kill them. He also is a proponent of euthanasia.
Singer makes his arguments from what “we value” on this planet – but he himself values and recognizes the dignity in so few people.