Dangerous Ideas Have Dangerous Consequences

“Which so called ‘dangerous idea’ do you each think would have the greatest potential to change the world for the better if it were implemented?”

That question was posed to gay activist Dan Savage during an appearance on an Australian television show.

Here’s his answer. 

Warning: Graphic Language

This is nothing new. For decades people have been promoting population control. The Nazis did it. The Americans wanted to do it but never really got the chance until the Margaret Sanger influenced Planned Parenthood gained prominence (and federal funding).

But there’s one question that those who push eugenics never seem to answer, at least not in public.

Who dies? Who exactly gets to do the noble service of taking one for the cause?

Progressive activists? Elite politicians?

Not hardly. While they may never say it publicly, at least not in clear terms, those who preach the gospel of population control have their crosshairs set on the weak and defenseless. That means babies. Unborn babies. Just born babies. Two-year-old babies. Or in Sanger’s and Planned Parenthood’s case, black babies.

And it means the sick. After all, if we’re going to be paying for each other’s healthcare, we can’t allow sick people to weigh down the system. If someone’s not doing their part and only emitting carbon, they must go.

But there’s another question. Who gets to decide who dies?

Progressive activists? Elite politicians?

Probably so. Which is one of the disturbing things about Savage’s comment. After he said it, people cheered. It’s as if they were assuming that they wouldn’t be the one’s chosen to take one for the team. And why should they have to? They we’re fit enough to survive their way out of the womb and through those first two (or 12) years of life that progressives like to say isn’t really life. But I wonder how many of those who cheered Savage’s comment drove home hoping that they never contract some terminal disease in a world where Mr. Savage gets his way.

Dangerous ideas have dangerous consequences.

For some, it’s fun to talk about those dangerous ideas. Maybe even to promote them. And the consequences can be fun too. Just so long as they aren’t the ones who have to endure  those consequences.

But back to the initial question.

“Which so called ‘dangerous idea’ do you each think would have the greatest potential to change the world for the better if it were implemented?”

Thanks for asking.

Before time began, God had his own dangerous idea.

He created mankind in his own image, knowing that they would rebel against him.

He sent his Son to live among the very people who rebelled against him, knowing that this time their rebellion would mean the attempted murder of the Christ Child. Old ideas die hard.

He ordained that his Son would be murdered by an angry mob, knowing that only the blood of this perfect Man could set his rebellious people free.

He brought this perfect Man back from death, showing us that he was truly God.

We are a bloodthirsty and rebellious people. We  have rebelled against the One who created us and we killed the only One who could set us free. We did exactly what God knew we would do.

The gospel is God’s dangerous idea.

The cross was the dangerous consequence.

So ultimately it is God who decides who lives and who dies. Before the foundation of the world, before even time began, God chose his own Son, instead of us, to endure the danger of his wrath. And by God’s grace, though faith, we are changed for the better.