[Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigs.ag
Sat Jan 24 14:51:38 CST 2009
/My daughter went to school with a boy who had two moms. I actually used
to work for the same company with one of his mothers and she, along with
her partner, have provided this kid with a stable loving home. Last I
heard they are still together and the boy is now a teenager. Advances in
technology have made it possible for gay and lesbian couples to bring
biological children into a relationship/
One is amazed that this sort of sick stuff is going on so close by.
Marti Wilkinson wrote:
> */The best way for women with children to be supported is that the
> woman be in a permanent loving relationship with a man/*
>
> I personally have never found it necessary to take the marriage or
> cohabitation route as a condition of living life to the fullest. While
> I am certainly open to finding a life partner, at this point it would
> be to complement my life and not complete it. It's been my blessing
> that I've been able to utilize resources which makes it possible for
> me to be a single parent. The above statement implies that somehow
> women are incapable of raising children without a man and that is
> simply not true. This is not to diminish the importance of men or the
> role of fathers, but to broaden what constitutes a family.
>
> My daughter went to school with a boy who had two moms. I actually
> used to work for the same company with one of his mothers and she,
> along with her partner, have provided this kid with a stable loving
> home. Last I heard they are still together and the boy is now a
> teenager. Advances in technology have made it possible for gay and
> lesbian couples to bring biological children into a relationship. I
> think children are better off being raised in a loving environment.
>
> The nuclear family is, in my opinion, a modern myth. My parents went
> to school with kids who lost their fathers in World War II and the
> Korean War. I'm part of a generation where some were left fatherless
> due to Vietnam. Historically it's only been a recent phenomena where
> mortality rates have increased to where children could realistically
> reach adulthood with both parents living. The civil war wiped out a
> significant proportion of the male population and many children were
> raised in extended family environments as a result. Then you had men
> who married more than once due to wives dying in childbirth. Obtaining
> a divorce was exceptionally difficult and many women opted to stay in
> miserable situations than to risk losing custody of their children or
> being treated by the community like a pariah.
>
> When we look at the work of women such as Margaret Sanger we can't
> take her words or actions outside of the context of the times she
> lived in. Even the Roe v. Wade decision needs to be looked at based
> upon what was known in the 1970's. Back then we did not have the
> advances in prenatal care and technology which has shortened the
> window of what may be considered viable. The mortality rate for
> premature babies ran very high then and still poses many risks now.
> The problem I have with many Pro-Life perspectives is the tendency to
> look at the actions of Sanger through the lens of 2008. That is about
> as logical as making the argument that Jefferson's Declaration of
> Independence is meaningless because he kept slaves and failed to
> mention women.
>
> Just my not so humble opinion - Marti
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Jenifer Cartwright
> <jencart13 at yahoo.com <mailto:jencart13 at yahoo.com>> 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
> <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>>/* wrote:
>
> From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Obama gets another one right
> To: "Marti Wilkinson" <martiwilki at gmail.com
> <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com>>
> Cc: "peace discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>>, "C. G. Estabrook"
> <galliher at uiuc.edu <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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/20090124/8d620305/attachment.html
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list