From: cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org (Chris Winemiller)
Newsgroups: houston.general,tx.politics,rice.politics
Subject: Re: Anti-choice vs. Pro-abortion (was Re: Houston Defending Choice C
Date: 22 Aug 92 23:01:03 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: None

[I point out that I am not the poster to whom Amy is responding]

AHEMP01@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU (Amy Hemphill) writes:

> >Nah, you're quite right, Lorra.  The poor are *such* downers.  Gawd, I
> >can hardly bear to meet the eyes of the beggars on street corners, any
> >more, don't you know?  Let's round 'em all up, march 'em into concentration
> >camps, and put the poor wretches out of their misery, eh?  No way your
> >white, middle-class children should grow up seeing such a thing, eh?  Out
> >of sight, out of mind, even if it's six feet under.
>  
> NOW WAIT JUST ONE DAMN MINUTE!!!!  I don't think that the argument that it
> is possible to be better not to bring a new life into an ugly, desparate
> situation is at ALL the same as saying that everyone who already lives in an
> ugly and desparate situation should be killed.

The "poor" referred to is those who were born who would've otherwise been
aborted.  That's exactly the argument Lorra made: the resulting babies would
be subject to a life of terrible poverty, so they should be killed off
before they have a chance to be born.  The other poster is showing you the
logical end of the argument Lorra proposes: why stop at the unborn?: "Let's
get rid of those poor who would've otherwise been aborted for the good of
society."  Sarcastic, perhaps, but not as farfetched as either you or I would
like to believe.

> Not once in her argument did
> she even so much as hint at that.  If we are going to be fair here, and try t
> get others to see our views, lets not twist them to such sick and depraved
> thoughts, shall we?  I do believe that if you will look back, YOU came up wit
> this idea about killing poor or sick or old people.  Now THAT is sick.

Go review the guiding philosophy of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned
Parenthood.  One of the fundamental reasons she founded the organization was
because she hated the poor (and the minorities) who kept having children. 
She wanted those vermin to stop having kids.  Lorra might not personally
hold the same belief, but at least one significant leader in her camp did.

> >No, you're a college-educated sociopath, a spoiled little brat who's been
> >educated beyond her intelligence, who has no capacity for human empathy.
> >A typical specimen of your kind.
>  
> You know, I'd really like to know what gave you such a twisted view of colleg
> aged/educated people.

I personally am a college-educated person (from the mid-70's and early
80's).  Even back then there was a predominant political philosophy on
campus ("liberal"), and to believe otherwise was to be "wrong."   If
newspaper reports can be believed at all, the "political correctness"
pressure is even greater than ever these days.  My point: not enough
diversity of political opinion on campus, leading to skewed viewpoints of
many of the students on campus.

(BTW, I don't agree with the extremity of phrases like "no capacity for
human empathy".)

> You know, in some of the colleges us sociopaths and
> spoiled brats go to, they do actually teach a thing or two about the world.

Yes, usually in concrete disciplines like architecture and engineering
(showing my bias :-)).  Even then, you don't really know what the real world
is like until you have to go out and earn a living in it.  Perhaps you are
one of those who have had to do so, even before you got to college.

> It's even required for graduation in most places that the student have a clue

(chuckle)

Chris

-- 
Chris Winemiller         Internet: cwinemil@keys.lonestar.org
                         UUCP    : texsun!letni!keys!cwinemil
Newsgroups: houston.general,houston.music