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: Lane3 who wrote (11749)	4/17/2001 11:27:01 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

With the indirectness of the funding combined with the delays that happen with government funding I imagine that the immediate operations of the contraceptive providers in the third world will not be effected. Its the continueing funding for the future that is at question. I doubt that there are no groups that could work with the federal government's aid program that are not involved in abortion. I'm also fairly sure that American government aid was only a small part of the funding for thrid world contraception. Other countries give a larger % of their GDP (some much larger) to non-military aid, and they are more active in monetary and rhetorical support for contraception. Then there is also privately donated money. From the pro-life perspective money sent to planned parenthood is government funding of an organization engaged in active evil causeing death on a massive scale. The "casualties of war" would be the millions of lives that are ended by abortion. That having been said I understand your concern for the practical consequences of this policy. Although I disagree with you about world overpopulation, it is true that individual countries have population problems and individual families have problems with too many children. Tim