[Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigs.ag
Sat Jan 24 14:07:45 CST 2009
NARAL is hardly what one should call a "charity". It's more like a
coven for infanticide.
Actually I never did understand the rationale behind forbidding polygamy.
Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> Oh, of COURSE, duh -- "a woman with children to be supported should be
> in a permanent loving relationship with a man. Period." Now WHY
> hasn't anybody else tho't of that?? The gov't and social agencies and
> NARAL and all the charities and all the other so-called helpers just
> need to get out of the way so that can happen, right?? Maybe we need
> to legalize polygamy while we're at it, so that the guys who are
> ready, willing and ABLE to take on that kind of responsibility can do
> so, because last time I looked, there was a whole lotta need.
> -- Jenifer
>
> --- On *Sat, 1/24/09, E. Wayne Johnson /<ewj at pigs.ag>/* wrote:
>
> From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right
> To: "Marti Wilkinson" <martiwilki at gmail.com>
> Cc: "peace discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>, "C. G.
> Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
> Date: Saturday, January 24, 2009, 2:21 AM
>
> I will read and comment on it Marti. Thank you for sharing.
> (btw, I can't send posts to sf-core)
>
> Before I dared to publish the videos about Sanger on my
> website I did research out each quotation to see if it was
> accurate and in context, and
> I did read several pieces and a few whole books by Sanger and her
> cohorts/colleagues online.
> The quotes made in the videos are indeed verbatim and although
> selected and disembodied from
> their context, I did not find that they are misrepresentations of
> Sanger's meaning or intent.
>
> I also recently ordered and received a book by Linda Gordon
> "Woman's Body Woman's Right"
> which is a history of the birth control movement from a
> Pro-Choice perspective. Gordon was
> also not particularly kind in her treatment of the historical Sanger.
>
> There is no doubt that the pro-life movement has some spin to the
> stuff they produce because
> they are trying to persuade not just report. Recognizing that, I
> did go and read the originals,
> and stuff from both sides of the argument.
>
> I have spent most of my life working in biology and biomedical
> fields related to agriculture.
> The fastidious environmental and nutritive requirements of the
> developing pre-born
> individual that is disingenuously misinterpreted as an argument of
> fetal viability
> invoked in Roe v. Wade, etc., is completely devoid of merit. Life
> doesn't begin at conception, it continues
> through conception in the form of a new individual with full
> potential formed by the union of
> a live sperm and a live egg.
>
> - - -
>
> The best way to understand Margaret Sanger is to go read Margaret
> Sanger.
>
> The thing that cannot be erased from Maggie Sanger's writings is
> that she was profoundly
> anti-poor and anti-negro and was quite worried that the world
> would turn into something
> like the scenario presented in "Idiocracy" unless the valiant
> agents of birth control intervened.
>
> ___
>
> I agree that the society is badly broken. It is so badly broken
> that I voted with my feet once
> and vowed not to ever come back. Things aren't any better.
>
> I don't think that the problem is capitalism or socialism
> exactly. Seems to me that we need them both.
>
> I see the problem being that too many people dont know how to get
> along with one another,
> too many are unaware, and too many are afraid of the truth.
>
> People are not getting good instruction on how to live their lives
> and form
> lasting bonds with their families because somehow the natural ways
> and instincts are being replaced
> with something socio-pathologic. I think one big problem is that
> we intervene too much and
> dont allow some people to go through the difficult sweaty
> transition of adaptation in the face of an
> irrevocable committment. Jumping out of an airplane is an
> irrevocable committment. Some eggs will
> need to be broken to make the omelet, and we have too many
> interferences that are halting
> the process because some people are afraid of it. (This may be
> unclear to some.)
>
> It does no good to render feelings of guilt or to simply criticize,
> but there needs to be a lot more understanding and willingness to
> be truly helpful.
> I see one of the real problems is that the men are not being real
> men. The best way for women
> with children to be supported is that the woman be in a permanent
> loving relationship with a man. Period.
> Certainly some 3-legged cats can climb trees. The manufacturer's
> recommendation is the full complement of 4.
>
> If the women and men dont want to submit to a conventional
> lifestyle, therein lies their problem. The problem is that we
> rush in and say "poor baby...you dont have to put up with that ole
> mean bastard...we will take care of you"
> rather than offering needed support but allowing people to work
> out the rough edges on their own.
>
> I dont think that abortion should be offered as an alternative.
> Ever. It's certainly not
> helpful to the economy or the society, it breaks down the moral
> fiber of the people, and...
> it's simply not necessary. Unless a mild form of genocide is the
> goal, in which case the
> utility is obvious as well as the morality, ethics, and understanding.
>
> Marti Wilkinson wrote:
>> I've attached an article written by Alexander Sanger who
>> addressed what he believes and cites as misrepresentations of his
>> grandmothers view on eugenics. I personally think the videos
>> present a great deal of distortion and it's hard to find a more
>> 'objective' source.
>>
>> What I see many of these responses touching on is that basic
>> access to health care, jobs that pay a living wage, and support
>> for women with children are the best way to actually prevent
>> abortions. Until we address some of these basic inequalities this
>> will continue to be an issue.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090124/f51d91e1/attachment.htm
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list