Commentaries posted do not necessarily represent the opinion of LDN.
 Any opinions expressed are those of the writers.

Babies and turtles

By Jim Killebrew

Send a link to a friend 

[February 05, 2014]  The other day a news story reported the devastating effects of a drought in Southern California. Farmers were scooping up the dry dirt that was too dry to plant anything. The farmer said he had irrigation pipes running under the fields, but the source of water was so scarce he would not be able to plant if another source of water could not be found. The impact of not planting and forgoing a crop in that part of California will affect millions of people in the United States and around the world. The soil in that part of California is such good soil the farmers are able to export their produce all over the country.

Not to worry, however; there are adequate sources of water in Northern California. The California government was making plans to divert a portion of the northern excess water to the drought-stricken southern section in time for the farmers to plan on a crop for this year. That plan has been put on hold because the Democrats in the state Legislature who have favored the environmental lobby have taken up the environmental cause to not send the water south.

Why? Because in the process of diverting the water from the north to the south, there is a probability that some fish will die. That's right! If the water is sent rushing through the tributaries headed south, some of the fish might die, and that is too high a price to pay for the farmers in Southern California to grow crops this year.

Nothing in the news story that was broadcast mentioned anything about any of the fish becoming extinct due to the flowing water. Of course many would simply move with the water and set up housekeeping in their new home in reservoirs to the south. But the trauma of their having to move would be too much for them to handle and many of them might die.

Therefore, so the Democrats in the Legislature reasoned, even though the impact on the Southern California farmers would be losses of billions of dollars, many jobs lost, farmers being ruined economically, millions of people around the country and world paying much higher prices for produce because of California's lack of production, the cost of the loss of a few fish now living in the northern waters of California would be too high a price to pay to move it south.

[to top of second column]

It sort of reminds me of the baby turtles in Florida along the coastline. Think about it: There are tens of thousands of people in this country who think it is reasonable and logical to kill at least a million human babies each year in this country through abortion before they are born. Yet, many of those same people are passionate about restricting lighting on private property on the coast of Florida so that turtles can be safe and protected coming ashore to lay their eggs in the sand, and the hatched, baby turtles may be protected as they make their journey back to the sea. The government put restrictions on private lighting on personal backyards located adjacent to the coast so the turtles may be protected as they deliver their eggs in the sand. The baby turtles are protected more than the human babies who are being killed each year through the legal means of abortion.

When our politicians side with people whose priorities favor the lives of turtle eggs or fish over the lives of millions of people who might not have enough to eat because of a lack of food, or millions more babies who have no chance to even be born, could it be we need to examine the reason why those politicians have set that priority for themselves? Why do we even listen to people whose reason and logic are this twisted?


Click here to respond to the editor about this article.

< Recent commentaries

Back to top