Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (916)	9/7/1999 5:56:00 PM
From: MikeH	Respond to of 6418

<<The killing of newborns is but part of the evidence>> But, could this not just be a functional expression of human nature? If my memory serves me, most cultures have had increasing abortion and birth control rates as they become more affluent. This is due to simple self interest. In a primative culture, more children means more success because there are more hands on the farm. But, in an advanced culture, (America, Rome, Egypt) fewer children mean less dispersion of wealth, and a better standard of living for the parents. The rising abortion rate parrelles the abortion and infanticide rates in ancient cultures. I'm not commenting on whether I feel it's right or wrong, just why I think that it occurs. Also there is evidence in ancient cultures to support increasing violence with increased affluence. As the citizen becomes more seperated from violence, there is a greater need for passive violence, hence Rome's circus, and Greece's comadies. Institutionally, the passive violence of these issues saties the human desire to lash out. Much like soap opera's make people happy that rich people have worse problems then they do.

To: jlallen who wrote (916)	9/7/1999 6:15:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

I certainly meant no offense by my comment about your being a lawyer. I am one, myself. And while we are not in a court of law, we are debating grave matters, which deserve reasoned responses. Thus, my chiding (which was intended to be gentle) about the "self-evident" nature of your evidence in support of your argument. The points you make are not "self-evident" to MY self. As I have stated before, I grew up during the Civil Rights era in the Deep South. At that time, the lives of black people were held very cheap, and that has changed, for the better, in my opinion. As an example. I imagine that Jews who grew up in Germany during World War II probably think that their lives are held more dear here and now. As an example. As for sex and violence on tv, I watch the History Channel and PBS, I don't see a lot of sex and violence, personally. I guess it's there if you go looking for it, but I don't. So, I do not think things are so bad in the Good Old USA in 1999, my dear jlallen.

To: jlallen who wrote (916)	9/7/1999 6:44:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

By the way, as you know, the opinion in Roe v. Wade was rendered in 1973. According to the United States Department of Justice, this is the total number of murdered children whose age was less than one year, from 1976 through 1994. As you can see, the raw number peaked in 1991, and began to decline. There is a table which shows that the raw number continued to decline from 1994 to 1997, the last date for which there were statistics, but I do not have that raw data. And, of course, the population increased during that same time period, so the murder RATE (number of murders as a percentage of population) would need to be calculated, but I'd say the raw numbers don't support your perception. 1976 206 1977 184 1978 216 1979 170 1980 222 1981 204 1982 246 1983 228 1984 199 1985 206 1986 280 1987 261 1988 275 1989 288 1990 305 1991 354 1992 268 1993 286 1994 271 ojp.usdoj.gov