They Can Afford It!

Posted in Politics, Society on July 6th, 2011

SocialismOne of the more ubiquitous, and certainly one of the most strident, rants of America’s domestics enemies is that the government should tax the “rich” more – much, much more. This is presented with two generalized rationalizations: the blatant, glaring, and glaringly stupid falsehood that the “rich” don’t pay their fair share and the somewhat less stupid idea that they can afford to pay more so it’s OK to take their wealth from them.

Presenting facts backed up by numbers and charts is, by and large, useless with the Statists and Socialists that call themselves Liberals and Progressives and it’s utterly useless with their minority tenants, who foolishly see themselves as beneficiaries of this agenda. Hence, I’ll leave that aside for now.

I will instead focus on the “They can afford it” rationalization since it is not based upon falsehoods, being instead based upon utilitarianism or consequentialism. I wonder how they would respond to a similar argument on a subject that Liberals have strong and visceral feelings about – abortion.

They Can Afford Them

Let America as a nation and society outlaw the abortion of White babies but continue to allow minorities, especially the Blacks, to engage in the unsavory practice. Let America as a people go so far as to guarantee these minorities access to abortion through subsidies and funding.

Due to the striations in household economies, including access to health insurance, Whites can, more often than not, afford to have these children. While an unplanned pregnancy might be an inconvenience to them, it is unlikely to drive Whites into true poverty. Statistics show this is not similarly true for minorities.

Furthermore, there is a long waiting list for White babies. There are far more prospective adoptive parents than there are White babies up for adoption. This is sadly not true for minority babies, especially Black babies who are seven times less likely to be adopted even after their prices – euphemistically called “adoption finalization costs” – are discounted up to 33% by the various agencies.

Finally, one also has to take the modern definition of racism into account. Since 64% of the women partaking of abortions are non-White, making it illegal for them to continue to do so would cause a disproportionate impact upon these minority women. Such disproportionate impact has been held by the courts to be racist and discriminatory even if the laws or practices in question have absolutely no racial component.

As can be seen from these facts there’s no reasons based upon consequences for continuing to allow Whites to abort their babies but many reasons to make sure that minorities, especially Blacks, are continued to be allowed to do so. The Whites can afford the children and the adoption system can handle those White babies that end up in it; neither is statistically the case for non-Whites.

~*~

The arguments above are all factual within the limits of polling accuracy and statistical analysis as applied to population groups. In point of fact, these arguments make up a large part of basis for the Liberals’ ongoing fight to keep abortion legal and have the government subsidize it. That doesn’t make this “modest proposal” any less abhorrent.

It’d be an interesting thought experiment to graph the outrage of who’s more bothered by criminalizing abortion for Whites and who’s more bothered by not doing so for minorities.

Yes, the rich can afford to pay more in taxes. That ability to pay more doesn’t mean that it’s right to tax them more just because others want their money, just as the facts of abortion demographics don’t make it right to base the abortion laws upon individuals’ and society’s ability to afford having and raising the children.

The argument that they can afford it so it’s OK to take from them is an example of the grievous flaws in utilitarianism or consequentialism.

Related Reading:

What Liberals Believe: Thousands of Quotes on Why America Needs to Be Rescued from Greedy Corporations, Homophobes, Racists, Imperialists, Xenophobes, and Religious Extremists
Introduction to the Philosophy and Writings of Plato
America: A Narrative History (Brief Eighth Edition)  (Vol. 1)
Kantian Consequentialism
DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century
[Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon] [Twitter]

Abortion Has Value

Posted in Ethics & Morality, Politics, Society on April 1st, 2011

Gina M. D’Andrea Weatherup Gina M. D’Andrea Weatherup of Stony Brook, NY, the Community Affairs and Advocacy Manager for Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic firmly believes that abortion is an intrinsically good thing as opposed to even thinking of it as a lesser of possible evils.

By her own pride-filled admission she’s not even limiting this, as many do, to cases of rape or endangerment to life of the mother.

No; this infanticidal monster is talking about abortion on demand for the sake of women’s convenience being a good thing, a moral choice!

Abortion has value. It is not just the lesser of two evils, but abortion can be a good, moral decision, in and of itself. And I am not talking about cases of rape or life endangerment. I’m talking about everyday women – you, maybe, or your mom, friend, sister, wife, girlfriend, roommate – who simply know that they do not want to be pregnant, and do not want to parent this child, at this time.

The one in three women in America who decide that abortion is right for them deserve to be recognized as people, as full moral agents, and not to be treated like children to need to be taught right from wrong. Women deserve easy access to high-quality, affordable abortion care, without waiting periods, and without biased counseling.

Until abortion is recognized as having value in and of itself, we’re going to continue to battle the Mike Pences, Chris Smiths, and Scott Roeders of the world.

– Gina M. D’Andrea Weatherup

There is one portion of this creature’s drivel that can actually agree with, that the women seeking abortions should not be treated like children who need to be taught Right from Wrong. They are, in fact, full moral agents, are fully culpable for their choices and actions, should be recognized as such by Americans, and deserve to reap the full consequences of those choices and actions.

Gina D’Andrea Weatherup Thinks This Is a Good, Moral Choice

I firmly believe and advocate that, while creatures like this Gina M. D’Andrea Weatherup are allowed to walk free among people of America and promulgate this infanticidal ideology that killing unborn babies is a good thing, our nation needs more people like Mike Pence, Chris Smith, and Scott Roeder. It especially needs more heroic martyrs such as Mr. Roeder who sacrificed himself in order save countless babies from Late-Term Abortion aka Partial-Birth Abortion.

Don’t get me wrong; I have some pity for the girls and women who have either chosen or been coerced by Planned Parenthood’s “Counselors” into choosing to abort their children as a horrible, but still lesser, evil. I don’t even have a strong hatred for Planned Parenthood as a whole; the bulk of their services being necessary gynecological care for poor women.

Things like this Gina M. D’Andrea Weatherup, however, do not deserve pity, compassion, or mercy from anyone and should not be considered just as valid targets, but as primary targets in Americans’ battle for the unborn.

~*~

I can’t help wonder if, while in their nice, shady backyard watching their cute little daughter play, Gina and her husband, Chris – I’m assuming that they’re married since she appended his surname to her own – discuss when to have that talk with her. You know, the one about “the birds and the bees, and the D & C’s.;-)

I also wonder if they’ve preformulated an answer in case their daughter ever asks, “How many of my brothers or sisters did you kill, mommy?”

~*~

But she is, in a twisted sort of way, right. Abortion has value. Gina and Chris’ house looks like it probably cost around 500K and abortion and her depraved manner of advocating for it helped pay for it.

Related Reading:

The Accidental Feminist: How Elizabeth Taylor Raised Our Consciousness and We Were Too Distracted By Her Beauty to Notice
Drowning Girls in China: Female Infanticide in China since 1650
Women's Voices, Feminist Visions: Classic and Contemporary Readings
How to Succeed in Evil
The Essential Feminist Reader (Modern Library Classics)
[Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon] [Twitter]

Hooters Placates NOW

Posted in Humor, Society on December 22nd, 2010

Feminazi Symbolism - Bringing You Hate Since 1968Hooters has chosen to placate the Feminazis of NOW in order to convince these pernicious harridans to cease their paper terrorism against them for daring to have high chairs and a children’s menu in their restaurants.

As perfectly befits Hooters, their solution was, “delightfully tacky, yet unrefined.” It will also likely work given the agendas involved.

Playing directly into the raison d’être of the Feminists, Hooters has decided to start producing and providing to all children brought into their restaurants very specific cookies!

Feminazi Fetus Cookie - Eating their own young is paramount
Hooters’ New Fetus Cookie – Kid Tested and Feminazi Approved

Fetus cookies would promulgate exactly the message that NOW holds as its core function, that the unborn should be killed at whim – as long as that whim belongs to a nominal female. Infanticide / Abortion is the foundation of their whole movement, as the behavior of Feminists during the 2008 elections proved beyond a shadow doubt to any sane American.

This brilliant, if immoral, tactic should get NOW to rethink their position on continuously attacking Hooters. After all, to a Feminist, what’s a few hot babes in skimpy clothing compared to getting children desensitized to the death of the unborn?

A spokesman for Hooters who asked to remain nameless informed said,

We’re not pleased with the idea of these cookies; they’re really sort of sick and creepy. They’ll probably do the trick and get NOW off our backs, at least for now, though.

When we showed the local NOW chapter samples of the cookies they really seemed to love them. I mean really love them. It ended up looking like the “Bake Sale From Hell”

The way those women started drooling and crunching on the fetus cookies was kind of scary, especially when they starting cooing and petting each other while stuffing their faces. Ugh!

We were..ah, how do I say it? We were getting pretty scared and disturbed by the end of it. It sort of looked like something from Shakespeare or one of those old Greek plays.

Obviously, we’ll have to wait and see how this pans out. The Feminists are not monolithic – except often in physical form ;-) – and some might not want to back off from their attacks upon Hooters since some might be hetero and be more hurt and scared by the beautiful girls at Hooters then others, while many are lesbians and, hence, less personally concerned with indoctrinating children into accepting infanticide as a woman’s “right” than with just attacking any heterosexual display.

All in all though, these fetus cookies are probably Hooters best shot at placating NOW and getting them to cease and desist their paper terrorism.

Related Reading:

Babe on Board - A Harry McGlade/Jack Daniels Mystery
The Goodnight Train
Snark! The Herald Angels Sing: Sarcasm, Bitterness and  the Holiday Season (Snark Series)
The common law
Hot Babes
[Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon] [Twitter]