From: parker@ehsn21.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:55:35 GMT

vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:

>kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:

>>In article <C01u1B.7H9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:
>>>hsims@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>>>
>>>>In a previous article, vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:

>>>>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.  

>>It is far more realistic to subsidize abortion, maybe even to incentivize it,
>>than to rely on people "controlling their hormones", and it achieves the same
>>economic result, i.e. reduction of the birth rate among poor people.

>Ahh.. I see.  You don't think poor people are capable of making intelligent
>decisions by themselves.  You want to make sure you hold their hand since
>you are so superior.  

This from the guy who wants to limit the choices they have available, about
the guy who would provide the choice and let them choose for themselves.
How hipocritical.

>Your statement that the desired result is the "reduction of the birth rate
>among poor people" is insulting and narrow-minded.  The desired result
>is protect the children, born and unborn.  

I'd settle for protecting those who are born.

>>>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.  

>>In my opinion...

>>The WORST "crime" is to let children starve. 

>Is murder a lesser crime than neglect?

It is better to allow a given unborn to not be born than to allow a child to
be born and suffer.  You don't have the right to be created.

>>The second-worst "crime" is to interfere with a woman's decision to abort,
>>either by mandating or forbidding abortion.

>Is murder a lesser crime than this?   

The mother is in the best position to make that decision.  How can the rest
of society know her situation.

>>The third-worst "crime" is for government to start interfering in sexual
>>relations between consenting adults by telling them to "control their
>>hormones" or whatever.

>Is murder a lesser crime than this?

(Of course this is all *his opinion*.  He may feel that murder is a lesser
crime.  I think however that "murder" has nothing to do with abortion; the
unborn is not a person.)

>>Fourth on my list of "crimes" is for taxpayers to end up supporting children 
>>of poor people who are otherwise unable to support them adequately themselves.
>>Look at our GNP sometime -- we can easily provide this support.

>Well then.. since you seem to think murder is okay to end economic problems,
>why don't you just run out and kill all the homeless, welfare families,
>unemployed, and elderly.  

>[snip]

>>>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.  

>>Has any state ever successfully prosecuted any woman for "murder", because 
>>she aborted, even BEFORE _Roe v. Wade_? If not, what's your basis for citing
>>"the laws of this country" in support of your contention that "abortion is
>>murder"?

>Of course not.. The women involved are not the murderers.  The abortionists
>are the murderers.  I have written on this extensively in this group
>and I'm not going to repeat myself just because you can't keep up.  

Good, then we won't have to read through your unsupported contention that
"abortion is murder" after we have repeatedly demonstrated to the contrary.

>>								- Kevin

>Edward Simmonds

-Rob