The Ethics of Cultural Murder

If the human species is to survive it must provide a benign, worldwide, uniform culture as a working environment. This is essential for a creative species. An intellectual culture, one based on real knowledge, is required to provide the creative atmosphere so essential for human invention, and thereby survival. The basis for a benign culture is a deep respect for human life, one which requires a species wide sincere effort to protect and nurture all human life. Any cultural practice which involves murder (the deliberate and premeditated killing of a human) diminishes the perceived value of human life and detracts from the intellectual energy so necessary for species survival.


It was learned from A Basis for Morality Conclusion 2 and Conclusion 4 as directed to the human species:

Since the product of life is survival, normal (expected, natural, moral, ethical) behavior within the human species is that which provides the optimum opportunity for the species survival. Individual or group behavior which supplies less than optimum opportunity for species survival, is perverted (not natural, not normal, unethical, immoral).

It was also learned from Conclusion 3 that:

The end result of life is the survival of the species (community) as opposed to the survival of the individual. In the natural process of life, the behavior and survival of the individual are subservient to the species welfare.

Considering those two conclusions as provable fact, the following text begins:


A culture is a set of individual behaviors which apply to a particular group of people. Since the human is neither instinctively nor intellectually uniform, there will be variances in individual behavior around a central average. The behavior of an individual is often contrary to that desired by the majority. A true description of a culture includes all behaviors, even those it tries to curtail. In that case both the undesired behavior and the behavioral effort to control it are parts of the culture. That individual, however, contributes to the culture, even though his contribution may be counter to that of the desires of the culture. Both the murderer and the police homicide department formed to apprehend him are elements of the culture. The culture in the United States is quite broad, and includes many behaviors which are not optimum for the survival of the species. Murder is one of those behaviors.

Whether war, terrorism, genocide, criminal murder, criminal execution, euthanasia, assisted suicide, abortion or infanticide, each creates an anxiety in all individuals. That anxiety is subtracted from each individual's objective thinking and productive ability. Each of these practices contributes to a cheapening in the value of the human individual. Each is a base practice which detracts from the intellectual culture. These practices do not fit well in a benign intellectual cultural environment. Each involves brutality to the victim and by the killer. The loss of the individual, though tragic, is a small part of the damage. The effects and social acceptance of such practices brutalize all human society. While the need in an intellectual culture is for respect for all human life, murder practices cause contempt for the value of human life. Some of these practices are not avoidable at the present time. All must be minimized and eventually eliminated.

The most deep-seated of all instincts in all mobile organisms is the will to survive. Threats to survival are acted upon with the highest priority. Since the human is intellectual, most behavioral decisions are based heavily on memory (experience, training, education). Any ongoing threat to survival is thereby prominent and enters into every decision process. Living under any threat against survival develops deep-seated anxieties, taking time away from creative pursuits for danger appraisal and precautions . An intellectual culture, an absolute necessity for human survival, loses efficiency when a portion of its productivity is siphoned off by unease and fear. It is absolutely essential that human culture be one of dependable safety and confidence. A deep and universal respect for human life is essential in such a culture.

Although many predators kill outside their own species, it is usually for food. When not for food, it is, in most cases, to eliminate competition for food. There are very few that will kill within the species. In most cases of strife within a species it is only the male that is involved and the intent is to drive away, to protect a territory for food or sex, but not to kill. In several species, death may result from the strife but it is not the intent of the strife. Premeditation in killing (deliberate murder) within a species is extremely rare other than in the human species, where it is quite common by both sexes. It is in fact a part of modern human culture and is expressed in several ways.

The human, due to its application of intellect to the solution of environmental problems (medicine, copious food, shelter, clothing, compassionate cultures, etc.), is in a state of evolutionary degeneration. Through the inventiveness of the human, the gene pool cleansing effect of the natural environment has been largely suspended. Deleterious mutations are predominant and are subsidized, thereby accumulating in the gene pool. The evolutionary direction of the human is degeneration, not diversity. This human degeneration effects both physical and intellectual mechanisms. This process must be recognized and steps taken to offset it. In the long run the complete redesign of the human, with the possibility of eliminating sexual reproduction, may be necessary in order to stabilize the human gene pool and provide an optimum social environment that will capitalize on the human intellectual abilities.


War, Terrorism and Genocide

War is premeditated mass murder planned and executed by cultural groups. A civil war is caused by a cultural split within a large cultural group, a split perceived by each side to be so basic that only violent domination of the other side can satisfy it. Terrorism is small scale war usually employed by small cultural groups who are, or believe they are, threatened by a larger cultural group. Genocide is a one sided war where the strongest cultural group seeks not only to violently dominate the weaker, but to murder its population as well. Each type of war has its own cultural rules and is conducted on the basis of one culture against another.

War is caused by cultural differences. Multiculturalism emphasizes cultural differences. Multiculturalism leads inevitably to war. Human instincts demand it.

From the time of Homo habilis to less than 10,000 years ago, a period of more than two million years, the human was a hunter/gatherer living in small tribes. There was fierce competition between tribes for the best hunting grounds. The strongest, best organized, most cunning and most vicious gained the best grounds and tended to survive better. If tribes became too successful, their population increased. Hunter/gatherer tribes do not function well when the tribe is too large. Transit time from camps to hunting grounds became too long. Game began to be scarce. At such times the tribe needed to split and a large portion became homeless, wandering away to search for another valley. Such splits often brought civil war within the tribe as capital goods were divided between those who stayed and those who were evicted. These new nomadic tribes searched for new ground. Often the new ground they found was already taken. This led to tribal (cultural) war.

Early in the history of the human, ethnic and racial differences signaled danger. A new group coming over the hill to make their home in your valley might have different colored skins, or speak a different language, or dress differently. These were signals of trouble ahead. With two million years of history, and starting long before the big brain developed, racial and ethnic bigotry is normal (instinctive) in the human.

Tribalism to the point of war is normal (instinctive) in the human. Genocide, the driving off or killing off of a particular racial or ethnic group is normal (instinctive) in the human. Terrorist acts started millions of years ago when tribes raided each other's camps or the lone hunter in the forest was ambushed. Terrorist acts, too, are normal (instinctive) in the human.

War, terrorism and genocide are normal (instinctive) in the human and will remain so until the human redesigns the human. The only methods available in the meanwhile to curtail these instincts are training (behavior by enforced edict) and education (behavior chosen by the individual in response to learning truth and fact). As with any other social (instinctive) drive, training is by far the most successful method for obtaining consistent and uniform control of social behavior.


Although the human species has a huge population that is widespread into every nook and cranny on earth, it is still quite vulnerable to annihilation due to internal conflict within the species. Nuclear and biological warfare would not only endanger the human species but it would also place all life in jeopardy.

War, the preparation for war, and the preparation for defense in case of war, are extremely expensive in terms of human assets. In addition to the individual hardships, the population becomes brutalized.


Tribal disputes over foraging territories are as old as man. Tribalism is a basic instinct in the human species, one that was developed over a period of 4 million years or longer. A different language, appearance, apparel, behavior, etc. is instinctively a danger sign, with instant distrust and apprehension. Since the behavior is instinctive it may not be educated. Intellectual control over the instinct (training) is required instead. The species must establish strong rules concerning hostilities and strictly enforce them.


Politicians are not reasonable people. By nature they are aggressive and arrogant power seekers. The larger and more complex the governing sectors, the more opportunity for warfare. The size and scope of the overall governing groups must be actively monitored, always with an eye to minimizing both, by keeping their scope as narrow as possible and their size as small as possible.

Ethnic differences become tools to inflame the public and obtain their cooperation. As long as the human species allows multiple cultures, wars are inevitable. In the final analysis, every conflict is fought over cultural differences. Integration of the species into one culture would be a giant step toward ending wars.


Criminal Murder and Criminal Execution

Criminal murder is rare in comparison with other cultural murder practices, but the drive-by-shooting, unmarried love nest murder, and drug dispute murder are all parts of American culture.

Murder by criminal execution is much rarer than criminal murder. Even when sentenced, the length of the seemingly endless appeals allows must convicted murderers to die natural deaths.

The propensity for murder in the individual is not uniform in the human species. Genetic divergence in the characteristics of the instinct profile in the human is a result of the evolutionary relationship between instinct and intellect (see The Degeneration of the Human). Cultural environment also plays a strong part. The attitude of the individual human toward murder, and thereby the likelihood of a favorable disposition toward murder, becomes the summation of the two effects. As a result, murder may be committed by individuals from any walk of life but is more apt to happen by individuals from poor cultural environments. When poor genetics and poor environment occur simultaneously in an individual, the result is often explosive. The murder spree is becoming more and more common, especially among the very young.


Criminal murder is not as common as death from many diseases, but its effect on the minds of the population is much more severe. It is also the subject of publicity which intensifies the effect.

Criminal execution is not significant in numbers, nor is it seriously followed even in the cultures that allow it. The effect is multiplied by the publicity surrounding any execution.


There is evidence that murder in the media (television, fiction, music, news) breeds murder. Every effort should be extended to curtail murder sensationalism in all of these avenues. The public deserves the news, but no more. Since the propensity for murder is a variable instinctive factor in the human mind, it will remain a severe problem until DNA engineering removes it. In the meantime, strict enforcement of law, quick apprehension and trial, and severe sentencing are the only tools available for minimizing criminal murder.

Criminal execution should be conducted quietly and humanely in the manner of euthanasia in Holland, perhaps as a gradual administration of morphine ending in an overdose. The death should be reported as simple fact without embellishment.

The publicity and sensationalism surrounding both murder and execution blows both problems out of proportion. All publicity surrounding both should be severely curtailed. They should be reported as cultural statistics, even perhaps summarized briefly once, and no more.


Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

Euthanasia is the premeditated murder of another human being by a doctor. The murder is at the discretion of the doctor. The theory behind euthanasia appears to be sound and reasonable. If a patient is unquestionably doomed, and is either comatose with no hope of recovery or cursed with uncontrollable pain, a quick and painless death is merciful. Unfortunately, it is also desirable from an economic point of view, and the doctor may have an entirely different opinion of acceptable life from that of the patient. Objective decisions tend to be much colder than subjective ones. Another factor entering into a decision on euthanasia is the age of the patient. The older the patient, the more apt he/she is to be 'mercifully' relieved of his burdens. A final factor is the attitude of the family of the patient. There are family situations where euthanasia may result from family pressure on the doctor, especially if at the borderline of decision on merit, and the patient has a liquid estate.

Assisted suicide is the premeditated murder of another human being by a doctor at the request of the victim. If the physical condition of the patient meets the requirements for euthanasia and in addition the patient wishes his/her life terminated, assisted suicide at first glance appears to be merciful. Since the desire to die by the patient is entirely subjective, however, the need to die is often clouded in uncertainty. There have been cases in Holland, where assisted suicide is legal, when the patient on admission expressed the desire to die but recanted later under successful pain therapy, only to be mercifully 'aided' by the doctor soon thereafter.

In practice, the distinction between euthanasia and assisted suicide becomes quite blurred. Depression is common in the terminally ill. By not treating the depression, and heeding the suicidal desires of the patient, assisted suicide becomes quite close to euthanasia, especially if the physical condition does not warrant patient termination.


Neither practice is widely accepted in the world today but it is suspected that both practices are widespread, being performed quietly and on a case by case basis. Without enforced guidelines, abuse is quite likely.

Patients become frightened at the thought of being admitted into a hospital that has the authority to terminate their lives. In Holland, where both euthanasia and assisted suicide are legal, some patients would rather suffer at home than take the chance, especially the older ones. Even though guidelines are strict, euthanasia/assisted suicide quickly becomes the way to empty needed hospital beds and to terminate mounting medical costs. It is unfortunate that a person in need of medical help must also carry the burden of worry about a possible deadly turn of that medical help.

Due to economic forces, the costs of medical care under a socialized medical system will climb without limit (see Socialism and Medicine. Socialized medicine brings pressure to institute life termination policies, even covert ones if necessary.


The hospice programs are a humane solution. Under such programs, the patient is made as comfortable as possible, both physically and mentally, using any available medical means, but death is not deliberately hastened by either action or inaction. High cost life support systems are not generally made available and diagnostic support is terminated. This compromise is economical, merciful and provides security for the patient. It, in effect, gives the patient control over his own demise.


Abortion and Infanticide

The life in the human is composed of two strands of DNA in each and every cell within the body. Unless and until a cell contains two strands of DNA, it is not human. Neither the sperm nor the egg contains 2 strands. They are alive but they are not human. The egg contains one strand of DNA together with a set of biochemicals which cause it to be an embryonic cell, one which will produce a human being when coupled with a male human sperm cell. The instant that the embryonic cell contains two strands of DNA, it is human. This occurs when the sperm couples with the egg, thereby providing the egg with the other life which is needed to develop the human. Since it is human at that point it deserves the protection and nurture of any human.

It is shear nonsense that the fetus is not human. There is nothing magical that happens to the fetus at birth or at any time preceding birth which converts the fetus from biochemical garbage that may be discarded to a human that deserves protection and nurture. It becomes a human the instant that it becomes a fetus. Any act to the contrary is criminal.

Whether the child is in the womb or the arms of the mother, the relationship is the same. The mother nourishes, protects, and cares for a human infant, one which is helpless and totally dependent on the whims of the mother. Abortion and infanticide are synonyms, acts of murder separated only by cultural practice.

Abortion is the premeditated murder of a human being where the parent desires the murder and a medical doctor, usually, acts as executioner. Even more perverted, the victim is the young child being murdered by its own mother.

When performed for medical reasons that involve the physical safety and physical health of the mother or the avoidance of a child so subnormal as to be a burden on the mother and society - where the net result of the abortion is clearly a benefit to society - abortions are moral.

In all other cases, especially when performed merely for the convenience of the mother, it is not only immoral and unethical, it is criminal, whether or not the laws of a land call it so. More than a million abortions for convenience are performed in America each year. Most women who have abortions are so slovenly in their sexual matters that many require multiple abortions during their child bearing years. Many deliberately carry an unwanted pregnancy until the fifth month before an abortion, using the doomed fetus as a birth control device allowing sexual abandon.

Indiscriminate abortion fosters a social view of expendable human life. Any society which fosters the view that one life may be terminated by another purely for convenience will not be able to focus on the long term survival of any life, much less the human species.

Abortion is not the only instrument of child murder used by the human mother. Of all of the mammals, only the human female will deliberately kill her own young. About 250 American mothers are convicted each year for killing their own children after they were born. Far more are not apprehended. It is also suspected that a large percentage of early crib deaths are actually homicides. In fact it appears that some mothers serially murder their own children (see Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). Even when the mother is caught and convicted, society partially subsidizes infanticide by considering it a crime of about the same severity as battery or burglary. The average sentence is about 2 years.

Child abuse by battery, starvation and cruelty is common in America. It is usually the mother that is at fault. Often she stands idly by, in such cases, and allows others to batter her children. Many other human mothers batter their newborn indirectly by drug consumption during pregnancy. Many such children never become normal adults due to such damage.

The cause of this condition is simple. It springs from the evolutionary process by which the modern human was formed. Simply stated:

  • Evolution diminishes characteristics not needed. (See Evolution)
  • Mother love is an instinct far more ancient than the intellect.
  • As the intellect formed in the human, it also verified and insisted on the practice of mother love as a social necessity.
  • Mutations over time to the mother love instinct degraded that instinct but the intellect, heeding social pressures, overruled such degraded instinct allowing such mutations to remain in the gene pool only because they no longer mattered. In time these mutations became common and widespread. Behavior was still moral and proper, but in many cases existed only as the result of the will power of the individual to be moral.
  • A new social order formed which postulated that the instincts should be followed rather than the intellect. It was no longer what one should do, but what one wished to do. Those with damaged 'mother love' instincts were now free to exercise their perversions.
  • The abortion social perversion has become so widespread that society now accepts the right of the woman to murder her unborn child with social approval and metes only small censure for infanticide.

Although this degradation of the mother love instinct in the human female is the result of a natural process, the behavior it espouses is socially unacceptable.


More than a million convenience abortions occur each year. A war or genocide in which that many humans were murdered would be intolerable. Such mass brutality brutalizes the sensibilities of all humans.


There is no excuse for a convenience abortion. There are adequate tools available to avoid the frivolous pregnancy. Birth control devices and medicines abound. There is also will power and self control. There is also crisis avoidance through intellectual planning. And, finally, there is personal acceptance of responsibility for one's actions. Conception, pregnancy, birth, and responsible child care are matters of deep reverence and appreciation of human life. Any frivolous activity adversely effecting such matters is immoral since it effects the quality of life of the next generation.

If there was ever an area in human behavior that needs the heavy application of intellect to a runaway, archaic and degraded instinct, it is in the intellectual control of individual sexual activity. Sex is serious cultural business. Sexual influence is deeply involved in every cultural activity. It was originally designed by evolution to be a means of procreation and a stabilizing influence on the mother-father relationship for the required long-term rearing of children. It was never meant to be a frivolous recreation. It is highly destructive if used in that manner.


If convenience abortions must be allowed then the mother who demands one should be sterilized as a part of the process. A woman with homicidal tendencies toward her own children has such damaged mother instincts, she will never be a good mother for any child. In an already overpopulated world, this screening of future mothers will partially offset the evolutionary problem causing the degeneration of the 'mother instinct'. In a sense, such practice replaces the normal evolutionary gene pool cleansing function in a much more humane way.

Increasing social censure of all mother murder, to the point of active and severe criminal prosecution, will be increasingly necessary to offset the growth in this despicable social practice, even though it is a result of the natural process of evolution. Damaged social (instinctive) drives abound in the human DNA. The 'mother love' instinct damage is only one.



READER'S COMMENT: How can you say that abortions are immoral when our laws specifically state they are not?

AUTHOR'S REPLY: A law establishes whether a given behavior is criminal. In most cases those behaviors which are criminal are also unethical and immoral. The set of behaviors which are criminal are contained within the set of behaviors which are unethical and immoral. Even if it should be desirable to do so, it would be next to impossible to legislate morality. Certainly it is immoral and unethical to disobey laws, but laws do not cover all conditions of morality. In this particular case, the law is wrong, since it specifically allows murder.

READER'S COMMENT: A woman has the right to control her own body. What she does with her own body is her own business. The fetus is a growth in her body and until it is borne it is no more than a tumor. At the most it concerns only the woman and her physician.

AUTHOR'S REPLY: It can be proven that the fetus is the body of a separate human being and is not a part of the body of the woman. If unmarked and unspecified tissue samples from the fetus and the mother were submitted to a laboratory for tests of the nuclear DNA, the DNA report would be returned that the tissue samples came from two separate human beings who were closely related. This is incontrovertible proof that the fetus is human and a separate human from the mother. Any human being deserves the protection of law.

If the woman has a tumor in her body and wishes it removed, it can also be proven that the tumor is a part of her body, and therefore within both her legal and moral control. If unmarked and unspecified tissue samples of the tumor and the mother were submitted to a laboratory for tests of the nuclear DNA, the DNA report would be returned that the samples came from the same human being.

It was recently announced that if a woman who is infected with HIV should become pregnant, she could bear a child which was free of the virus by following certain medical procedures. It is obvious that during the pregnancy the fetus is not infected, or it could not be born free of the virus. Before, after and during pregnancy, all parts of the mother's body are infected. During and after pregnancy, the child's body is not. Tissue and blood samples from any location in the mother's body, except the fetus, would show this infection. During that same period of time, if tissue samples were taken from any location in the fetus, they would show a negative HIV infection status.

The obvious conclusion is that although the fetus is in the woman's body, it is a separate living being. As shown above, tests of DNA from fetal tissue would show that this separate living being is a human.

READER'S COMMENT: We have a severe world-wide over-population problem. Two things would happen if we abolished abortion: (1) the population would expand at more than a million more people each year, and (2) unwanted children are a burden on everyone and are more likely than wanted children to become criminal or wards of the state.

AUTHOR'S REPLY: I agree that we must control the birth rate and hold the population to a viable number which is in balance with the ecosystem and one that maximizes the comfort of the human. Abortion is a brutal birth control method. There are many other tools that may be used for that purpose that are not brutal in themselves and as brutalizing to the society as a whole.

Recently an 18 year old man was convicted of the rape and murder of a young child. He was given a life sentence without parole. The current life expectancy of 74 translates into 58 years of free board, room, and medical care while in a high cost guarded facility, all at the expense of the community - yet we freely terminate human life by the millions, simply because they might be in the way.

We have a contradictory cultural behavior toward our own genetic welfare. We abort more than a million innocent human lives each year, most of whom would have become productive citizens in our society, while maintaining expensive prisons for people that we have judged not to be innocent and who have little probability of ever being anything other than a burden on society. From a genetic standpoint, for every untried human we abort we should also execute a criminal (with no more fanfare than the abortion). This would help our population problem, improve societal economics and quickly diminish the amount of crime.