From: vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu ()
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:41:34 GMT

hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:

>In a previous article, vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:
>>jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl) writes:
>>>This is the same attitude I have seen from pro-lifers
>>>all along.  They'll get arrested to save a life, but
>>>once the baby is born they could care less.  Try to get
>>>some of these folks to support social programs like
>>>WIC or foodstamps.  It's a hoot!
>>> 
>>>Jared Dahl
>>>Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
>>>Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
>> 
>>Blah blah blah.. how many times have we heard this ludicrous argument.
>>In taking a life a murderer forfeits his rights because he has WILLINGLY
>>with MALICE ended another person's life and given evidence that he cannot
>>be trusted to participate in society.  Laws are designed not only to enforce
>>morals, but to teach them (Why does it seem like I keep saying this...).
>>The only way a law can teach is if the punishment fits the crime and
>>if it is executed SWIFTLY.
>>
>>An unborn baby has undertaken no conscious action of any kind, nor with
>>any malice, to threaten any member of society.  Thus, without due process,
>>it is your contention that this baby be found guilty of nothing and 
>>sentenced to death for it.

>Fetuses do pose a threat to members of society - the women that they are 
>living inside of.  Every pregnant woman faces a risk of death that is greater 
>than 0.00.

So do people driving cars.  The issue is whether someone has demonstrated
through an ACTION they have willingly undertaken that they are a LARGE
threat.  This is a very weak argument you present here.

>>The resistance you hear from "us" concerning social programs is not
>>a result of our lack of respect or concern for human life, rather it is
>>from the opposite, our concern for human life.  Creating a welfare state
>>inhibits people's belief in themselves, promotes and reinforces their
>>feelings of helplessness rather than encouraging the desire to change their
>>situation by themselves, and punishes those who have accepted the 
>>responsibility for their own destiny (ie. people who work).

>Really, those poor, homeless, and hungry children should just take 
>responsibility for their lives and find a job.  Funding programs such as 
>WIC will just encourage infants and children to be lazy bums.

Those poor, homeless and hungry children should have had parents responsible
enough to realize they couldn't afford to feed children.  If they could
have controlled their hormones there wouldn't be a problem.  You tell me which
is the worse crime, society refusing to pay deadbeats or deadbeats knowingly
bringing children into the world whom they cannot feed.  Would any decent
person bring children into this world to watch them starve?  I think not.

And yes, wasteful social programs WILL encourage children to be bums because
they learn by the example of their parents.

Only an idiot would hold children responsible for the stupidity and 
cruelty of their parents.  If programs that help these children could be
enacted that would truly be uncorruptable and beneficial to them, they would
be warranted.


>>This is not meant to imply that certain situations don't exist where some
>>assistance is warranted, but rather that many more exist that would be
>>better solved by encouraging self-dependence rather than state-dependence.

>But when it comes to abortion, you would rather have the state take charge 
>than let the pregnant woman make her own decision about her life and her body?

Abortion is murder.  It's not a question of just the mother's life, but also
the baby's.  The laws of this country already state that murder is wrong so
in fact the state already has control over this issue.  The only problem is
in making people aware of what abortion really is... cold blooded, vicious,
violent, painful MURDER.  

This isn't the forum to discuss abortion.  If you would like to argue it go
to talk.abortion. 

>>Edward Simmonds

>				.... Heather.

Same as above --^

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh