Is Soylent Green Really That Fantastic?

It was posted on the progressive, Seattle PI website, and was entitled, “After death: Washington state set to become the first to allow human composting.”  

That’s right. “Seattleites will likely soon have a unique option to remember their loved ones after they die. Washington state is set to become the first to allow "natural organic reduction" as a burial alternative - commonly referred to as human composting - as a bill legalizing the process was approved by the legislature and now heads to Gov. Jay Inslee's desk.” 

“Democratic Sen. Jamie Pedersen of Seattle sponsored the bill because he said it makes sense - it's a low environmental impact way to dispose of remains. ‘We can show the way for the world about a better way in dealing with this universal human experience,’ Pedersen said in a tweet. …composting bodies could allow for the deceased to give back. The process will turn a body into soil within weeks.” 

Katrina Spade, CEO of Recompose, said that “Americans are largely faced with two options after death: cremation and burial. Burial takes up a lot of space, and those buried can own their plots forever, which is not sustainable. Cremation releases greenhouse gases and particulates. But composting bodies could allow for the deceased to give back."

Now, to help save the planet, instead of burying or cremating grandma, you can have her ground up and made into compost. What a great and enlightened idea. 

I wonder how long it will take the left to suggest yet another option - grind up grandma, or that post-aborted baby, freeze dry the remains and sprinkle it on one’s organically grown salad. Grandma’s Croutons – made by and from real Grandmas. 

I mean, what’s fish food made out of? Dried and flaked fish. Sounds abominable, or it would if it were something other than just fish. Or would it be? What about dog or cat food made of the dried and flaked remains of dead canines or felines? Would we really be that upset or unsettled? I doubt it. 

How far off are we then from the premise of Soylent Green? The oceans are dying – the plankton is disappearing. The society of the future must replace the dearth of plankton as a food source. So they harvest the dead, break down their bodies and feed the processed remains to the unsuspecting citizenry as Soylent Green. 

Sounds shocking and horrifyingly gruesome, or at least it did when Charleston Heston starred in the movie in 1973. Soylent green is people!

But a lot has changed. Society has evolved to become much more enlightened, so as not to worry as much about trivial things like life and death. 

Oh, we haven’t quite gotten to Soylent Green yet, but we’re well on our way. And unlike the movie, where the secret ingredient remained just that – a secret, it seems radical leftists today might hail the scientific advancement as yet another way to combat climate change. 

Of course, due to current federal regulations regarding ingredient labeling, people would have to appear. Wheat flour, sugar, salt, people. But no additives or preservatives. 

It would have been utterly unthinkable just a few years ago to even consider what radicals today call “post-birth” abortion, otherwise known as homicide. A botched abortion leads to the live birth of a viable baby – just to have the mother decide to keep or “dispose” of it. In other words, permit someone to murder it, or just let it die in a closet somewhere away from any ears that may hear its wailings. 

Although assisted suicide has been around for a while, it is rapidly becoming less controversial. Years ago, I wrote that Europe has even taken it a step further. 

“Holland has sanctioned six national "Roving Death Squads" who travel the countryside in search of candidates that "request" suicide assistance. It started out as a voluntary program but government progressive eugenicists seized the opportunity to expand the "assisted suicide" program into a quality of life program.” 

So really, how far are we from some leftist actually suggesting such a thing as Soylent Green?