Posted on 11/26/2004 10:24:02 AM PST by skellmeyer
interesting....
So, you're saying that we're running out of French? And this is bad because.....
"Killing your customer is generally not good for business. It is amazing how many people don’t understand this."
No quite so catastrophic as killing, but also counter productive are insulting them, brow-beating them, annoying them. Yes, it truly is amazing how much the French, the MSM and the Dem party have in common.
An excellent and concise demonstration of the link between socialism and legal abortion! Good work! Thanks for posting this!
I would guess that there are more Dem abortions then Rep. Abortions.
Wouldn’t this equate to LESS Dem. voters as we go along?
The Dem.s are aborting their voter base.
Oh, oh, he said the N word!
If you like this, you might also like some of the products on the Bridegroom Press site, like my discussion of the natural law to a teen audience (BabyTalk), the treatment of the Theology of the Body (Sex and the Sacred City) or the discussion in which I demolish ten pro-abort arguments from the perspective of an atheist (I Was A Pro-Life Atheist). http://bridegroompress.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=57
No, in general, this is not a bad thing, but the problem we'll face is that French Muslims are multiplying like rabbits... not a good thing for the French, or us.
If the French are a pain in the posterior now, imagine what it'll be like when their increasing Muslim minority makes them act even crazier.
That was the first thought in my head, too!
because they are being replaced by Moslem North Africans.
I actually saw a study done on this once and that was the conclusion. Of course there are certain assumptions built into the study, % of children who vote in lock step with their parents, that a certain % of a certain race votes democratic, etc...
Ironically, if it wasn't for abortion, we would be living under a socialist regime. Before I get flamed, I am not condoning abortion, merely pointing out the irony.
Clearly, capitalists with a long-term view of wealth accumulation like neither contraception nor abortion.
How do you explain Bill Gates and Warren Buffett?
Yes, I realize that - but then we'll know our enemy by their ONE face - rather than the two-faced ninnies we now deal with over there.
Buffett taught Gates how to think on these issues, Gates is just a follower. So the real question is Buffett.
The answer is that Buffett believes Paul Ehrlich and company. That is, he honestly thinks the world is being overpopulated, that resource acquisition is a zero-sum game in which someone always loses. Though he makes money like a capitalist, he thinks like a socialist.
He's not that unusual. Armand Hammer was a socialist who accumulated wealth like a capitalist in the last century. George Soros has done the same thing. It just goes to show Orwell's line, "Making a lot of money is easy, if all you're interested in is making a lot of money."
"Clearly, capitalists with a long-term view of wealth accumulation like neither contraception nor abortion."
"How do you explain Bill Gates and Warren Buffett?"
They don't like the competition!!
"Clearly, capitalists with a long-term view of wealth accumulation like neither contraception nor abortion."
"How do you explain Bill Gates and Warren Buffett?"
They don't like the competition!!
But from an economic standpoint, that's demonstrably false. Stipulating that Mr. Buffett isn't objectively stupid, then he must be invincibly ignorant, willfully ignorant, or mentally ill. Whichever it is, you'd think a man of his advanced age would be afraid to die with "I kept thousands (millions?) of babies from being born!" as his "accomplishment."
You're a theologian, aren't you? Maybe you can help with a question I was pondering in the weeks before the election. To what extent does a Catholic have a moral obligation to overcome ignorance? When a person supports a higher minimum wage, even though it demonstrably damages employment prospects for the most needy workers ... and higher tax rates, even though they demonstrably produce lower tax revenues ... and socialized medicine, even though that clearly debases human life and dignity, particularly for the old, children, the handicapped ... is that person morally responsible for supporting policies that are known to hurt people, or is he "innocent" simply because his fantasy is so powerful? Or is a person who steadfastly denies objective reality mentally ill?
"Killing off future customers" doesn't seem the recipe for long-term sales growth!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.