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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (4154)	1/31/2001 1:51:49 PM
From: E	Respond to of 82486

Daniel (and CR!) -- Abortion funding for the poor is inadequate in the U.S. It's a real issue that has just been newly raised by the executive order that cuts off funding for non-abortion services in third world countries in the case of clinics that offer even counseling about abortion. There's one of those "visceral index" factors figuring into the "analysis" going on around this issue, I think. Women who use abortion instead of, say, a condom, and so have abortion after abortion disgust most of us to the degree that we want them out of our faces. We'd better think of something, because they aren't going to be out of our faces, and neither are their multiplicitous often-neglected children and exponentially more multiplicitous and dysfunctional grandchildren. Get out your checkbooks, tw and other "human rights" fans.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (4154)	1/31/2001 4:10:16 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

I confess to being somewhat mystified by the debate here about public funding, since by all indications, there isn't much. Offhand, I'd say it's sort of a red herring. If its a matter of principle it might not matter if there isn't much. The reason that people object to it is usually not because the dollar figure is to high. If it turned out that the US spent $10mil (an almost insignificant amount on the scale of US government spending) on a program to snatch small children and torture them to see how well they dealt with pain, would you think there was no cause to complain about this funding merely because it was funded at such a low level? What program run by the US government do you have the most moral or philosophical objection to? If it was funded at a very low level would it then be ok for you? The reason that some insist on it is also probably a matter of principle for them. Tim