do I really have to say it???
Posted on 05/12/2006 11:52:13 PM PDT by Lurker
In unearthed letter urged President-elect Clinton to 'reform' country
A letter to Bill Clinton written by the co-counsel who successfully argued the Roe v. Wade decision urged the then-president-elect to "eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country" by liberalizing abortion laws. Ron Weddington, who with his wife Sarah Weddington represented "Jane Roe," sent the four-page letter to President Clinton's transition team before Clinton took office in January 1993.
The missive turned up in an exhibit put together by the watchdog legal group Judicial Watch, which has been researching the Clinton administration's policy on the abortion drug RU-486, notes James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web.
Weddington qualified his statement, saying, "No, I'm not advocating some sort of mass extinction of these unfortunate people. Crime, drugs and disease are already doing that. The problem is that their numbers are not only replaced but increased by the birth of millions of babies to people who can't afford to have babies.
"There, I've said it. It's what we all know is true, but we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights, we view any program which might treat the disadvantaged differently as discriminatory, mean-spirited and ... well ... Republican
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Ping...
I couldn't disagree more. Republicans want properity for everyone--or at least the opportunity for prosperity for everyone. If our economy is doing so badly, why are employment and wages both increasing?
Wow. If this is true (I'll take it with a grain of salt considering the track records of the sources), this should be trumpeted on all the evening news broadcasts. But of course, it won't be. It would only be if a Republican of little import said something like this, so it could be used as a hammer against Republicans in general.
}:-)4
I can assure you, these people do exist. I work in a state legislature. They believe it is virtuous to provide tax payer funding of abortion to moms who may be carrying a "defective" baby.
As an aunt of a beautiful niece with Downs and an unbelievable grandson with autism, it is more than I can bear to think about it.
These hypocrites who preach "tolerance" are the most intolerant themselves.
I'd like to make abortion retroactive for liberals. They truly are mentally defective.
Of course you couldn't disagree more.. that's why your policy does the opposite of your rhetoric. Nevermind that, though, if you can say what you're for, you can't be held to account for your results right? Thought that was the democrat paradigm..
we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights, we view any program which might treat the disadvantaged differently as discriminatory, mean-spirited and ... well ... Republican
This is an interesting sentence and very instructive. He lies to himself about liberals belief in individual rights, proposes a program which treats the disadvantaged differently, then characterizes his own views as Republican. That's as good an insight into the liberal mind as you're ever likely to find.
Sorry dude - but this claim in Freakonomics has been debunked - just do a google search.
The drop in crime is related to rising sentence lengths and longer imprisonment of offenders.
**** "eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country" by liberalizing abortion laws.***
TRANSLATION:
Kill off the Blacks through the Genocide of Abortion...
Gotta love these "Compassionate" Liberals.....
To me the biggest hindrances to employment of the poor are irrational minimum (or so-called "living") wage laws and the spreading of an expectation that children are an option to which everyone, regardless of economic, domestic, or marital circumstance has a right but to whom, once they are conceived, no one but the government and taxpayers has an obligation -- and that only if they are permitted to survive gestation and the peri-natal period.
It used to be that fathering bastards was shameful as was begetting and conceiving children while taking no thought to their feeding and housing. Now it's considered a right which only the cruel question.
As to the current Republican stance on illegal immigration, it is shameful and incomprehensible. And as long as Republicans tolerate clowns like Spectre (or however that ghoul's name is spelled), we will always deserve at least some of the attacks you aim at us.
do I really have to say it???
Amen.
Rhino: Why do you think the crime rate has dropped so steadily in the past 40 years? We are murdering would be criminals before they are born. Its not worth the cost in human life but its a real result from abortion.
I'd like to see the problem addressed before conception
Explain your underlying assumptions, if you will. It seems that you are implying that criminality is innate (genetic). Is this what you are saying?
If tomorrow, some unforseen misfortune occured in your life and you lost everything you now have and as a consequence, you found yourself among the ranks of the poor with no hope for recovery, should any future offspring you sired be deemed 'criminal?" and thus needful of 'abortion.' After all, if you had 'made it in life,' so to speak, but then 'lost everything,' wouldn''t that be indicative of 'poor genes"?---the sort from which society ought to be protected?
I saw John Stossel interview the guy who did teh study, and from what he said the the places with higher abortion rates DID have greater drops in crime.
He also said, and after seeing the interview I tend to beleive him, that this had nothing to do with supporting or opposing abortion. He was trying to explain what factors entered into the drop in crime, and abortion was one.
I wonder if Clinton responded to this letter and if so what did he say?
Everytime I get in an argument with my liberal relatives, about why we can't put in place all the utopian ideals they have, the argument always gets around to them saying "there's just too many people on earth -- we need to get rid of some of them."
Spreading prosperity abroad can be done without destroying jobs in the US. And if it were truly spreading prosperity that you were concerned with, the foreign workers would be paid american wages. They aren't. See how easy those copouts are wiped off the map.
As for 'living wage' laws. There is a minimum amount of money per hour that you can pay under which no one can live. IMHO, it is above the current minimum wage. I couldn't rent an apartment, pay basic utilities and eat on what I earn. And I'm above minimum wage by a bit. So it isn't some irrational sum. Give a man land and he can feed himself. Give him a paycheck instead and he'll have to work twice as hard to have nothing - including the land. That is what businesses profit from - gaining more productivity from an individual than what he's allowed to show for himself at the bottom end of the wage scale. If civilized society is an improvement upon anarchy, this should not be the case. Yet it is.
We agree on the issue of fathering bastards; but, some people make bastards of themselves by their actions rather than by their birth. That, in the minds of some, is plenty ok as long as they're the one being bastards rather than being treated like one. When the Dems were in power and pissed on you, you guys whined and moaned like children and instead of treating them with the respect you knew you were deserving of, when things changed, you treat them like bastards because you're in power and can do what you please.
further, what you call 'unparalleled growth' now, you dismissed as 'bubble jobs' under Clinton. A bastard in one circumstance and a prince in another. It isn't by happenstance of quality. We've all been treated to the breakdowns of the jobs actually created on other threads here.. mostly service sector - retail and sandwich shops type crap that pay minimum wage. If that's 'unparalleled growth, I'd wonder at what you'd call creation of decent jobs that afford people something beyond breathing and eating.
As for attacks.. heh, it's always interesting how, in certain circles, stating the truth is an attack. If the truth is an attack upon you, you do indeed have a problem.
The GOP is kneecapping the underclass and acting like it's the white knight for handing out tax cuts. As I've noted elsewhere, If bush is responsible for his tax policy, he's responsible for his trade policy. I got a three hundred dollar tax check on that first round. I'd gladly return it if the 30K a year plus benefits job that his trade policy helped offshore were returned to me. But, I don't get that option. And I'm interested in stopping the rape of America for profit. You can call it spreading prosperity - that's just an excuse. And it's one, as it happens, that the poor negotiator who handled offshoring our account threw out when he came to apologize to us for not doing a better job. He was seeking, at the time, anything to make him feel better about the situation - it didn't work for him either. Didn't really work for anyone. But it's still floated as though a valid excuse - and crumbles on inspection of the facts.
This clearly shows that you reject the argument abortion affects crime because statistics don't show that higher abortion rates ion some states don't have a greater affect on crime.
My point is that this is a completely erroneous assumption. It is like saying that flossing twice a day reduces cavities, so flossing 4 times a day will reduce them even more. It is statistically possible that no matter how much more you floss, the rule of diminishing returns means that affect is negligible. The same may be true of abortion. I really don't know, but your statement is flawed in terms of its logic.
Also, I don't my if you call me irrational and then back it up, but I didn't intend to be beligerent. Sorry if you felt that way. I actually respected your arguments and was enjoying the prospect of an exchange with a thoughtful person with whom I only intend to respectfully disagree.
30th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
There, I've said it. It's what we all know is true, but we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights...
How sick...how unbelievably arrogant. Speaking of rights while adovcating the out and out enfringement of the most fundamental right...the right to life.
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.