Religion And Car Crashes

Unfortunately, religions are not interested in deaths from car crashes. Neither are religious “pro life” politicians.

Every once in a while here I go on a rant about car crashes. I do it to point out the hypocrisy of anti abortionists.

About 40,000 people a year are killed in car crashes. This is predictable. Almost all of them are preventable. Since almost all of us drive cars and do not believe we will be killed in a car wreck, we do not want rules that would make us safer.

Because we buy into this myth of being car wreck bullet proof, there is no expression of  moral outrage like marching in front of abortion clinics with signs about “murder”. It’s OK to blame others, like young women, for the deaths of fetuses. It’s not OK to blame ourselves for not supporting safer cars or driving rules.

The link explains that with new technology messages could instantly be sent to electronic signs ordering us to slow down when conditions ahead were dangerous. We could allow ourselves to monitored with electronic speed monitors and sent a speeding ticket when we did not obey the safety conditions.

And, here is one that will get your goat. We could be required to wear helmets. This one rule might cut crash deaths by thousands the first year. There is a big problem with helmets, “They would mess up my hair.”

When someone says, “We are a society that values life,” I have to chuckle. Really we are not.

19 Responses

  1. Henry

    Jon:“This is predictable. Almost all of them are preventable.”

    We could also prevent the untold sexual assaults and rapes by the liberal probort Hollywood scum. The solution is simple. Set up a board licensing actors, producers, and directors. For licensure, require continuing education in professional ethics, criminal background checks, and frequent drug screenings. Problem solved, but liberals will ignore. High school sports officiants require more vetting than these liberal scum.

  2. Juan Ruiz

    I have driven all over: Europe, Mexico, LA freeways, Manhattan… What I’ve found is that many people drive as if they were the only ones on the road. No turn signals, cutting people off and cutting across lanes to get to an exit. Eating, texting, combing hair. Speeding. Never mind DUIs.

    No real way to control that mindset.

      1. Rob

        Whatever you call it, the resulting harm was not intentional.
        I’ve never heard of a wreck less, unintentional abortion.

        1. Juan Ruiz

          Not to split hairs, but every time someone drives drunk, or texts, or eats, or cuts someone off, it IS intentional. The car doesn’t act on its own…at least not yet.

          1. Rob

            ” Not to split hairs, but I’ll split hairs.”
            You’re not really splitting hairs; you’re just changing the entire premise.
            Again, it’s intention versus accident

          2. Rob 8:35 you’re just changing the entire premise.

            It is you who is changing the premise. You make the assumption a fetus or one fertilized egg is a human being. Then you compare killing it with killing a person in a car crash.
            Waiting on why the one fertilized egg is a human being.

          3. Juan Ruiz

            “Again, it’s intention versus accident”

            Rob, you really are a dolt. Every time someone gets into a car drunk, or combs their hair or eats, it’s intentional. There are no “accidents”, short of a meteor falling on a driver. Everything else is pure stupiity.

          4. Rob

            If someone intentionally kills someone while driving their car over them, that is a different scenario. It’s called murder.
            None of the drunks or otherwise distracted drivers you or Jon were referring to were intentionally trying to kill someone.
            Abortions don’t happen by accident because someone made a poor prior decision. They happen because someone decided to get an abortion.
            100% of abortions, end in abortion.
            Not sure how much more plainly I can spell this out for you.

    1. Rob 7:09 Your senseless analogy attempts to compare an intentional act to an accident.

      Typical of someone who values the life of a fetus 100 time greater than the value of someone killed in a car wreck. If you were really pro life you would be lobbying for laws that would save lives. Instead, you just toss anonymous complaints here on this blog. Tell us again why a fertilized cell is a human being. Correction, you have not told us once so you cannot tell us again.

      1. Rob

        Tell me where I have said a fertilized cell is a human being. News flash: I haven’t.
        Like I said, you’re comparing an intentional act of destroying a fetus to an unintended consequence of poor driving decisions, or mechanical failure.
        Thus, a real poor analogy on your part.

        1. Rob 10:25 Tell me where I have said a fertilized cell is a human being.”

          In the past year or so I have started deleting some posts here where people play games like you are playing. It is obvious beyond a doubt that you views on abortion are infused by religion. The religious views that go with anti abortion rights hold that one fertilized egg is a human being.

          Another fellow that played that game was called Nemo. He refused to acknowledge the religious basis for his anti abortion BS. Our friend, Matt, is anti abortion and sometimes plays with notion the one fertilized cell can be called a human being for other than religious ideas. But, he mostly wears his religion on his sleeve and I do not delete his posts except when he cuts and pastes prayers.

          That is why I continue to point out that you believe the fertilized egg is a human being.

          1. Rob

            Wrong again.
            Yes I’m well aware of your deleting of posts; they are like a badge of honor. If Jon can’t refute, he must delete.
            I know that abortion is wrong according to my faith. I also acknowledge there are faithless people who are ok with abortion. It’s a free country. They have that right.
            Where you and I differ is on a viable fetus; a term I have mentioned here many times. If the pre term baby is viable outside the womb it should not be aborted regardless of ones religious views; this scenario is a result of wonderful advancements in science and medicine.
            For someone who champions science advancements in trumped up evolutionary theories, it is ironic you refuse to acknowledge a living preterm baby you can witness first hand.
            In summary, when it comes to legality, I believe the mother should have the right up until the fetus is viable based on science.

          2. Rob 7:40 Thank you for outlining your views on abortion. While I agree your view is not the fertilized egg of Catholics and millions of others, it is difficult to base a law entirely on “science”, or, one part of science while ignoring other parts of science. If, for example, society agreed the difficulties of using hypothetical births and the complications for the mother are too great the majority of the public may make a decision different than yours. For example, it were theoretically possible to keep a fetus alive outside the mother but 99% of them died anyway would society decided abortions of all such fetuses should be outlawed. That is what society has done with deaths from car crashes. The bother of driving slower, wearing helmets and other measures have more value than the lives saved. Science tells us we can eliminate nearly all deaths from car crashes. The majority rejects this science. The lives of already born citizens is just not that important.

            I will continue to refer to the anti abortion political view as belief the fertilized egg is a human being even though that is not your view. Your views has nothing more going for it than theirs.

        1. Juan Ruiz

          ” thou has fled”

          If you are going tp play with archaic English at least use the correct verb conjugation: hast.

          1. mark anthony

            thanks professor. it’s the quote as got it online. couldn’t get it from my works of Shakespeare. that’s packed preparing for a move. maybe your comment was well intended but I took it as a condescending put down.

  3. Freedom

    About one half of all deaths from car crashes can be blamed on people who are using drugs or alcohol. But the Libertarians don’t want the government telling them what they can and can not do. What does religion have to do with any of this?

Comments are closed.