Over at American Descent, Geoffrey made a comment about other countries having good ideas. Though it was in context apart from what I'm about to relate, this Russian idea is one worth adopting.
As mentioned in his book America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It, Mark Steyn speaks of the depleting populations around the Western World. The linked piece points out Russia's horrible birth rate, largely due to a very high rate of abortion. The United States still has a birthrate that is high enough to replace those that die off, though at a far lower rate than in years passed. Though many simply choose to have fewer kids than in earlier times, abortion also plays a part.
So, aside from the obvious immorality of abortion (which compounded the previous immorality of promiscuity), we also face a decline in population that threatens us economically. How much less would our Social Security problem be with the 40-50 million aborted lives allowed to live and grow into productive citizens paying into the system?
The best part of the article mentions an abortion free day, where women are schooled in being good mothers. What a concept!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Great find, Marshall!
From the link: "More astounding, the city's universities will screen films describing the detrimental effects of abortions."
Too bad our universities won't show them.
From the link: "And a representative of the city's government says that "doctors will do everything they can to stop women from doing the irreparable.""
That is one of the things the pro-legalized abortionists ignore. People change their minds sometimes, and woman often do so during their pregnancies when they are feeling very stressed or unsupported.
But you can't undo an abortion.
Good point about Social Security. The scientific fact that abortion destroys an innocent human being is all the reasoning we need to demonstrate the immorality of the practice, but there are many other negative consequences as well.
Sure, let's emulate the strongman government of Russia and deny women the right to control their bodies - that will prove to the world that we are the bastion of freedom - for sure.
A decline in population? Since when? According to the US Census Bureau we have gone from 282 Million in 2000 to over 305.7 billion today. Russia has a problem because they have millions of people leaving the country and an "abnormally higher death rate (especially among working-age males due to poverty, abuse of alcohol and other substances, disease, stress, and other afflictions)." They also have one of the highest suicide rates in the world. This is the country you want to emulate?
If we had a Social Security problem (which we don't), then we could probably get more benefit from the additional work hours and wages that would follow universal health care.
"deny women the right to control their bodies"
How about the bodies of the females (and males) in the womb? Where is their control? As usual, the pro-abortion reasoning begs the question and forgets the other human being.
"If we had a Social Security problem (which we don't)"
Ah, where to begin . . . on the one hand, the sooner this Ponzi scheme crashes, the better. But a few tens of million more people would sure help push the date out farther.
DL,
Take a pill. Who's saying that we emulate everything Russia does? What I would surely like to see emulated is the true education regarding abortion, warts and all.
As far as population growth goes, if you actually read the post without getting the vapors, you'd see that I didn't say we were losing people. But that doesn't mean that it can't happen. Already, we know that many people don't intend to have large families. Of course there are economic reasons that dictate such things, but nonetheless, it is happening. Abortion further reduces any "risk" of the country having "too many" people. Consider also that those figures you quoted most certainly include immigrants, and if you have any knowledge of Steyn's book, it is immigration that is figuring into the population "growth" of many nations, particularly in Europe. Now, it might not be a problem to you, but with the immigration of Islamic peoples, many of whom do NOT integrate themselves into the society of their hosting country, a reduction in the replacement rate could have serious ramifications. They won't have to bomb us out of existence, they'll just be able to wait for us to die out as they continue to breed with reckless abandon. They are the demographic with one of the highest replacement rates.
As to SS, we most certainly do have a problem when you consider how much fewer people are working to contribute compared to twenty years ago. If I'm not mistaken, it's less than 5 workers for each recipient, whereas it was something like 12 to 1 or better in years past. Try to pretend that's not a problem, especially with medicine and science providing more ways to extend lifespans.
Finally, "controlling womens' bodies"? Lame argument as that is not happening with anti-abortion legislation, should there ever be any. It's called protecting innocent lives. Those are lives that the women invited into existence. It is not their bodies in question, but the growing bodies within them.
Social Security works just like any other insurance. The premiums (payroll taxes) of those who are not receiving benefits and the investments of those premiums pay the cost of the benefits to claimants. It is no more a ponzi scheme than a typical term life insurance policy.
The Social Security Administration will be able to pay all benefits until somewhere in the 2017-2030 time frame without dipping into it's investment principal. Beyond that point, they could still pay 75% or so of benefits until around 2041 from current revenue. Of course, there is no problem tapping into the $4.3 TRILLION trust fund for a decade or two if necessary.
Most right-wingers hate Social Security because it proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that government programs are effective in combating poverty and improving the lives of Americans. That is a big threat to their mythology about "free markets".
As for abortion, I know better than to argue the point. What I would like to know is why right-wingers who seem to have no qualms about the death penalty or war or the 18,000 Americans who die every year because of a lack of health insurance - why do you find abortion to be such a horror? It isn't a respect for human life obviously, so what is it? A desire to keep women in their place? A deep-seated fear of human sexuality? Inquiring minds....
Marshall,
Thanks for clarifying your position. It's good to know that you recognize that the population growth problem is really more about bigotry than statistics. I am not worried that the white population of the US might become a minority because of the higher birth rates among immigrant populations. The essence and nature of America does not lie in our having a majority white Christian population, it lies in our ideals of freedom and equality.
If you think that diversity is a problem in need of a solution, the less controversial and more easily enacted solution would be to provide quality sex education for all, real opportunity for all, and free contraceptives to all.
"What I would like to know is why right-wingers who seem to have no qualms about the death penalty"
Aborted babies = innocent
Capital punishment recipients = guilty (and they have 10 years of appeals)
20,000 abortions per week.
1 (one!) capital punishment per week.
"why do you find abortion to be such a horror?"
I don't think human beings should be crushed and dismembered without anesthetic. Go see abort73.com for some pictures of the procedure you think is benign or even a moral good
"Of course, there is no problem tapping into the $4.3 TRILLION trust fund"
Do you seriously think there is a trust fund? Congress already spent that money.
DL,
It is not bigotry to insist you remain aware of just who is and who isn't populating various countries. It isn't those who believe in our system of liberty and democracy. If it was just another benign culture like our own, then there'd be no problem. But unfortunately, those who are doing the "populating" are not less than benign in their beliefs. It might be your grandchildren or great-grandchildren who are forced to convert or pay extra tax as a second-class citizen. You might have no problem with this, but I'd like better for my descendants and the world in general. So if I'm bigoted to warn against the spread of Islamofascism, then I gladly accept the title. If Muslims can somehow convince the world their way is better without resorting to force in order to do so, I'm way cool with that. I don't see it happening.
What makes you think we are not concerned about life, or are not really pro-life, just because of our stands on capital punishment or war? Are you that lame that you'd offer such a weak argument against doing away with the heartless destruction of human life? And people don't die as a result of no health insurance. They die as a result of bad health generally resulting from poor habits. If people can't afford insurance, there are a number of reasons why that don't have anything to do with the absence of universal health care.
And there is already the most valuable sex education of all and it is easily and readily available to everyone free of charge. It's simple, and perhaps you've heard of it. It's called DON'T ENGAGE IN SEXUAL INTERCOURSE!!!! Are you amongst those fools who believe that sex is necessary for life? That people somehow suffer from not getting their jollies? What pathetic creatures we are if that's true. I reject it wholeheartedly. Have some spine. Have some honor and self-discipline. Teach it to your young. Be mature and face reality.
The viability of SS is based upon contributions by those still in the workforce. There are fewer per recipient, as I've already stated, than there ever was before. The fact that you can sit there and say that all well until 2041 and then reduced bennies or later retirement age or higher amounts withheld from the working people means that the system is in trouble. Having destroyed 50 million unborn (that we know of---chemical abortions from the Pill account for an untold number) means we've reached that point far faster than by merely not having 3 or more kids per married couple. Be serious. This is basic stuff here.
Marshall, when you attack another culture as "not benign like ours", then you are exhibiting a prejudice toward that culture. You are also being rather arrogant about your own culture.
Once you start caring as much for the lives of the innocent Iraqis killed in this needless and senseless war as you do for the blastocysts and fetuses aborted by their mothers I will take your argument about murder and the sanctity of human life seriously. Once you quit making excuses for not really caring about the 18,000 who die from lack of health insurance I'll begin to believe you actually care about destroyed fetal tissue. Once you realize that life is sacred regardless of the presumed guilt or innocence of the individual, I will believe you have a consistent and serious respect for life.
DL,
Are you suggesting that Islamic radicals are just a bunch of sweethearts willing to live and let live no matter what faith one chooses to follow? Is that what you're saying? If so, I admit I wasn't getting the joke.
But of course you weren't joking. That's too bad because that would be far more acceptable and tolerable than what you are doing, which is pretending I mean what you know I don't mean. However, I am indeed predjudiced against any culture that believes it is acceptable to hack off heads, or hands, or to beat to death females for the crime of being raped, or to strap explosives to mentally retarded kids in order to blow up unsuspecting civilians. Yeah, I'm very much prejudiced against such a culture.
And I am very much confident that ours is the finest culture overall, even with goofy lefties winning elections now and again and furthering their secular nonsense upon us. I have absolutely no problem believing and announcing that ours is the most superior on the planet. By doing so, I automatically determine all other cultures as inferior to ours. You call it arrogance. I call it pride and a keen sense of reality, and I can live with the boo-hooing such confidence might provoke.
I do indeed care about all the innocent Iraqis who have died since this war began and I hope that the scumbags we are fighting pay completely for it. If there weren't so many of them in Iraq, there would not be so many innocent civilians dead right now. Think of how many were tortured and killed before we got there and that was when nobody, including psuedo-compassionate liberals, was doing anything about it. They'd be dying still if not for our involvement. Since we got there, those that have died died in the struggle to free them, just as so many died in our country in the struggle to free the slaves, and before that, to free ourselves. Now, fewer people are dying in Iraq because of our efforts and by the time we leave, they will be fully capable of defending themselves.
Nobody, I mean NOBODY dies from lack of health insurance. If that were in any way true, then everyone who ever died while having health insurance needs a refund. Health insurance, even if paid for by you, will never insure that people who don't take care of themselves will not succomb to their lifestyles. I'm not about to feel guilty because you believe it is somehow moral to require that one party pays up for another who isn't necessarily deserving of the largesse. Better than free health care, I favor access to medical care when needed to be paid on some sliding scale, a percentage garnished from wages or welfare until payment is complete. This system would encourage (or "force" if you prefer---either is good by me) more people to take responsibility for their own health. You might find this oppressive, but consider your own situation. If you have a deductable (and smart people have the highest allowed), it's likely you go out of your way to prevent having to shell out dough if you don't absolutely have to. This keeps you honest about your own health, and it lessens the burden on the health care system.
Even Hitler's life was sacred in my book. Too bad he threw it away. Even if he hadn't popped a cap in his own cap, justice would have required that he pay for his crimes with his life. To allow such people to live after so callously taking the lives of others, diminishes the value of those victims. Life is so precious that justice demands such a punishment for the illegal taking of a life. In every culture, murder carries such a punishment (except in those leftist nations that don't honor innocent life as much as they do the lives of murderers). It's not as if it's a freakin' surprise. "Oh gee! Had I known I'd be up for the death penalty, I'd have only winged him!" Everybody knows the penalty, which makes it worse for the perpetrator, who thus is begging for such a sentence.
It seems to me that it is YOU who has a problem with the true value of human life. You're willing to do nothing to protect it.
Marshall,
Not all Muslims are radical fanatics, and making that generalization exhibits prejudice. Many of them believe in our "system of liberty and democracy". Quite a few Christians do not believe in allowing others liberty to do things they don't like nor do they want democracy if their view is in the minority. We shouldn't condemn all Christians because of that however.
The rest of your tirade merely underscores your contempt for those who disagree with you and your utter lack of respect for human life.
DL,
Where did I mention "all" Muslims? I believe I've been clear in highlighting radical Islam in my comments. You can ignore my comments, but they are there for others to see, which won't work for comments that pretend otherwise. Thus, there's no prejudice on my part upon which you can heap scorn.
In addition, I really can't see how anyone can read my comments and see an "utter lack of respect for human life." On the contrary, I'm confident I've shown a great respect for human life. You're welcome to try to show otherwise. Good luck with that.
Shown contempt for life? Really not sure what you mean by that but the following sentence surely shows a contempt for facts:
"Nobody, I mean NOBODY dies from lack of health insurance."
It happens every single day, all around the United States.
I have contempt for facts? ME??!!
""Nobody, I mean NOBODY dies from lack of health insurance."
It happens every single day, all around the United States."
"Lack of health insurance" has no affect on health whatsoever. It's a nice rhetorical ploy that you lefties like to use, but it is meaningless beyond words. What kills people is illness or injury. As I said before, there are plenty of people who died at a time when they had health insurance and they died anyway. It didn't have any chance of saving them.
The left would show more compassion for those unfortunates lacking health insurance by encouraging them to not only focus on working towards getting coverage, but working towards never needing it.
Post a Comment