Everything Is Anti-Life
30 June 2025
It has long been obvious to those paying any attention at all, that we are living in a death cult. That might seem like an exaggeration to some, but bear with me, it will be readily apparent shortly, if it isn’t already.
There is a distinct anti-human, anti-life motif about everything Governments and their partners in the “private sector” do. The so-called “Life Sciences” companies spend their entire time finding novel ways to make people sick and then sell them fake cures. Tech companies are looking to replace people with “AI” and robots. Enormous sums of money are spent trying to convince us all that humans are a cancer on the Earth, that there are too many of us, and our mere existence is an existential threat to… our existence. I never said it made sense.
Pretty much everything the would-be rulers of us all do is to cause harm and death, either directly or indirectly. Policies that keep wages and salaries low but ramp up the costs of things we need to live bring about suffering and untimely deaths. Stress is a well-known cause of poor health and lower life-expectancy, and yet everything Governments do is designed to cause more stress. Threats of fake viruses and made-up pandemics, threats of wars, conscription into wars, monopolising “health care” and then slowly destroying it, we can see this theme repeated over and over.
Then there is the policies of importing people who (some, obviously not all) do not care for the way we live our lives, undermining community cohesiveness, lowering wages further, creating the “gig economy” and some even committing violent crimes, which then take years to be dealt with. We know this is happening, we can see the results. This is not an “anti-immigration” rant. No-one has an issue where people decide on an individual or family basis to move to another country. There is a difference between that, and what is happening now.
People get offended by the term “illegal” in the context of immigration. People instantly want to call you a racist for suggesting that perhaps the notion of unlimited people in a limited space has practicality issues. People rush to call you a bigot if you posit the idea that the strapline “Diversity is Strength” makes very little sense when it comes to a functional society. The strange thing is the “progressive” types who shout you down for questioning the wisdom in having the the fruits of the labour of future generations spent now on free stuff for people who often have at best questionable motives for arriving here, are the first to screech about White Colonialism.
It is right to point out that if thousands of English people rocked up on the shores of an African country week in week out, where no-one was checking to see if any of those English people are criminals, but instead they were given free hotels to stay in, with free health care and so on, also with the expectation that the African country has its Government change laws in favour of the English arrivals, burdening the infrastructure and already precarious financial situation there, this would be very very wrong. What is odd is that this standard is not applied universally.
Personally I’d like nothing more than to see all the Governments of the world disappear, and people be allowed to navigate life for themselves without national borders, taxes and the rest of the trappings the myth of Authority brings us, but we do not live in that world at present. Anyway, the point here is that almost every single policy enacted by Governments, and this is not a partisan thing, Red or Blue, Left or Right, they are designed to cause stress and suffering, and ultimately death.
The kinds of things listed above are subtle. If you’ve noticed any of them then they don’t appear subtle at all, but one can only assume it is subtle enough to escape the attention of the terminally afflicted Statist.
But, it is the Current Year™ after all and evil is beginning to enjoy stepping out of the shadows more and more.
Earlier in June this year we had MPs voting to decriminalise late-stage abortions. Of course this is paraded as a “victory for women” and “reproductive rights” and cheered on by those that think ending a life is fine if it’s inconvenient, but only if the woman choses to do so. Rightly so, the father alone cannot decide to end the baby’s life. But the mother can. Again it makes no sense. Obviously I am not arguing that fathers should be able to decide the baby be aborted, I am simply pointing out the incongruence.
In the BBC article linked above it describes the usual playbook. Nicola Packer took abortion “medication” during lockdown and when it turned out the baby was around 26 weeks she ended up arrested and an absurdly lengthy police “investigation” took place. Eventually she was found not guilty because she’d said that she had no idea she was that far along in her pregnancy. Of course this was lockdown time, more Government policy, and so all the usual services available to pregnant woman were largely stopped, because of a fake pandemic. This though was very convenient for those that have wanted to make the laws on abortion more permissive, and naturally this case was Exhibit A for Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi and the rest of the ghouls that voted for this.
They were able to use sympathy for Ms Packer in the form of placing the blame for this horrendous sequence of events on “archaic abortion law”, in order to make their sales pitch. Reading through the BBC article the contradictions are obvious. Antoniazzi is quoted as saying…
“Each one of these cases is a travesty, enabled by our outdated abortion law…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2le12114j9o
Originally passed by an all-male parliament elected by men alone, this Victorian law is increasingly used against vulnerable women and girls.”
Heidi Stewart, the chief executive of BPAS is later quoted as saying:
“This is a landmark moment for women’s rights in this country and the most significant change to our abortion law since the 1967 Abortion Act was passed.
There will be no more women investigated after enduring a miscarriage, no more women dragged from their hospital beds to the back of a police van, no more women separated from their children because of our archaic abortion law.”
So which is it? A law unchanged since the Victorian era, or was it changed in 1967? That minor detail aside, this is more emotive rhetoric based on the circumstances deliberately created by the Government. There was absolutely no need for Ms Packer’s case to be “investigated” for 4 years. Whatever one’s view on abortion is, that was obviously ridiculous and seems like it was created almost entirely to be used as a prop in the bid to make it easier to kill babies.
BPAS is the euphemistically named British Pregnancy Advisory Service, who describe themselves on their website as:
…an independent healthcare charity which, for more than 55 years, has been advocating and caring for women and couples who decide to end a pregnancy.
Nearly all of the women we see have their care paid for by the NHS. We are the leading specialists of abortion advice and treatment in the UK, taking care of over 100,000 women each year in over 55 reproductive healthcare clinics nationwide.
Nice to know as we are forced to pay taxes and that goes to pay the salaries of corrupt child-molesters, fund wars and all kind of other horrendous things, they also fund the best part of 100,000 abortions a year. The number of babies killed is only going to go up with this “decriminalisation”, because that is obviously the point of it. The pantomime of “oh these poor women won’t be investigated” is to distract from the obvious outcome which will be more abortions. Unsurprisingly if you remove the penalties for doing a thing, people do the thing more often, and obviously there is no group of people that better understand the effects of punitive legislation than people in Government.
The anti-life cult is becoming more obvious in its methods. It has literally gotten away with murder so many times it is emboldened to the point that it now publicly celebrates the instigation of more death.
But, just when you think that is about as overtly evil as things could get, the Government never fails to deliver. On the 20th June the Guardian published this…
Er… what?
The Government is looking to enshrine in law, “death for all”.
“Okay” some might say, “that’s not really what this means, this is about sparing people the suffering and indignity of a painful death”.
That’s the sales pitch. We’ve seen a very concerted effort to romanticise being killed by the State. Articles like the one in September 2024 from the Daily Mail describing how couple Peter and Christine Scott have signed up to use the “double suicide pod” called Sarco, to avoid “spending their older years in a failing NHS as well as losing their home and life savings to expensive care costs”. Again, deliberate Government policy is fuelling death.
People who defend this will claim that only the absolutely desperate, the most tragically and terminally ill people going through terrible suffering will be using this State service. There will be protections in place etc. etc.
As we looked at previously, in Canada this is not how things have worked out. Since introducing its MAID service, the Canadian Government is now the 4th leading cause of death. You can see that when you look at the numbers on this site and then look for anything on that chart that has a number higher than 15,343. There are only three things, cancer, heart disease and accidental deaths.
This is evil incarnate, and now we have the UK Government celebrating “death for all”. It is not fully enshrined in law yet, but it is difficult to see how it won’t be by the end of this year. All kinds of entirely unevidenced claims that these policies are backed by huge public support made by politicians and spokespeople for abortion and suicide services means that as always, no matter what the public actually wants, they’re getting death.
If the State has its way, if you manage to survive pregnancy and are born alive, and then survive all the other ways the State tries to shorten (or end) your life through “health” policies and the other things we looked at earlier… if you survive all that, the moment you express dissatisfaction with your lot in life or become a “burden”, the Government is there to administer “compassionate” death to you.