U.S. Coalition for Life
I received this press release today:
The United States Coalition for Life announced today it is opening up its vast pro-life archives to the public.
Established in 1972, the PA-based USCL is the oldest pro-life research organization in the United States. Its research files span more than 35 years and cover all areas of pro-life concerns, which includes population control, abortion, contraception, eugenics, sterilization, euthanasia, vital organ transplantation, homosexuality, classroom sex instruction, and fetal experimentation….
I’m a relative newbie in the pro-life activist world. Have only been involved for 9 years. So I’d never heard of USCL. But I nosed around its archives and found interesting stuff, like this rude flyer from Planned Parenthood circa 1970s…
And wasn’t liberal feminism live and well in the 70s? This is awfully sexist.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“You can’t be congratulated on your morality…”
Planned Parenthood lecturing someone on morality… yes, because we all know that objective moral values are grounded in the very nature of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Something is moral not because PPFA says it is moral, but because what is moral comprises the very essence of what PPFA is.
That’s essentially what Kant and others argued, right?
how is homosexuality a “pro life concern”?
That pamphlet is disgusting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhI6VkUIuNw
SUPREME COURT STEPS – SIT IN – MARCH – DEC 5 – OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE
SPREAD THIS FAR AND WIDE!!!
http://f2a.org/coast2coast/ObamaCitizenship.htm
http://f2a.org/radio/Download%202008-12-02.htm
Senator’s Mel Martinez Disappointing response to the Obama Birth Certificate Issue. Seems like Martines wants to ignore and throw away the US Constitution:
Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Obama’s citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.
Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our courts and political processes.
Article II of the Constitution provides that “no Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.” The Constitution, however, does not specify how that qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama.In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect’s birthplace. Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.
The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg’s suit and held that the question of Obama’s citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.
Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.
After he is sworn into office, Mr. Obama will be our nation’s President and I intend to bestow upon him the honor and respect due any man who holds that Office. Yet, I am certain that there will be times when I will disagree and oppose President Obama’s policies. When that happens, you can be assured that I will pursue vigorously what I believe to be in the best interest of Florida and the nation.
I thank you for sharing your views with me and will keep your concerns in mind. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact me. For more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Mel Martinez
United States Senator
Planned Parenthood did not and does not value human beings. That is the reality and the tragedy of the abortionist movement.
“Planned Parenthood did not and does not value human beings.”
Gee Joe, how could you WRITE such a thing about an organization that refers to more than two children as extra?
Senator Martinez seems very confused. His letter lacks reasoning and logic.
If Obama would have been vetted properly in the FIRST PLACE he would not have been able to run in the primary nor the election to become president.
The voters have nothing to do with determining the validity of his birth certificate. The vast majority of voters don’t even know about this controversy because it was rarely if ever reported in the MSM. The media has failed to look into this issue. If asked, Obama supporters would probably answer that it was Sarah Palin who was not a US citizen because she lives in Alaska which they would not know is even one of the 57 states. oops….I mean 50
What an insane ridiculous response. No wonder our government is so screwed up.
But seriously, this was 40 years ago. So maybe PP has changed their stance and is now “tolerant” of all views. Do you think we will ever see Planned Parenthood apologize for this or say that they no longer hold the views expressed in this pamphlet?
Just like when people like Lila Rose catch PP red handed, I give PP the benefit of the doubt, realizing that this may have been a few bad apples. Do we ever hear an apology from PP? Do they ever say that what their employees did was horrible and in now way represents the beliefs of PP? I’ve never seen it. Although PP may not produce literature like this anymore, I have no reason to believe that they would ever DENY approval of this kind of literature. This is why this organization is pure evil. Even someone who supports abortion has reason to believe that PP is dishonest and sick.
Wow.
You can’t be congratulated on the birth of a healthy son because you clogged up the earth with the first four.
So much for saying they’re “pro-choice.”
Thanks Sandy! Senator Martinez apparently just doesn’t get it.
1. I think the birth cerficicate madness is not a serious issue or even worthy of comment. However, the Senator’s response made no sense. The voters have spoken would not be a legitimate response if there was indeed a rational reason to question President-elect Obama’s citizenship.
2. I’m not as troubled by the pamphlet as most of you. The attitude of some families of that era was that they “needed” to have a son and would keep having children until they did. That devalued girl children and caused bigger families. Some at Planned Parenthood decided to attack that view in rather inartful terms, but I get the point.
why dont we ask the smithsonian to hang this little gem of an ad below sangers heroic portrait??? : )
1. I think the birth cerficicate madness is not a serious issue or even worthy of comment.
It is indeed a serious issue. We are headed towards a Constitutional Crisis and if Obama is sworn in as an inelegible candidate, we will have a Usurper in Office.
A large Grassroots movement is being organized to address this issue.
Obama clearly is not a “Natural Born” citizen for a multitude of reasons and circumstances.
And even if Obama proves that he was in Hawaii, he is still NOT “Natural Born”.
Hal, you obviously fail to take note of the fact that even if *gasp* people are “trying for” a boy, there is still no reason to berate them or question their morality.
There is no excuse for this pamphlet, and the fact that you’re defending it speaks volumes.
I’m Catholic and I want to have many children.
I’m serious!!! :)
Pro choice grapples on when a life becomes a human. I grapple on when hal becomes a human.
Humans exhibit respect and compassion.
“Hal, you obviously fail to take note of the fact that even if *gasp* people are “trying for” a boy, there is still no reason to berate them or question their morality.”
I think it’s immoral to “try for a boy.” It devalues girls.
Bringing too many children in the world is considered immoral by many (not me, but it’s a legitimate view)
I can understand disagreeing with this pamphlet, I do too, in some ways. But I’m not offended or outraged. I think your outrage meter is quite sensitive for anything involving Planned Parenthood (or Obama)
This isn’t news to me. Being the mom of six I am constantly told I’ve been “irresponsible” for having so many children. Only my neighbor, who has eight, has it worse than I do. (That I personally know anyway.)
My only consolation is that my six children will carry my values of a large family while the people making these rude comments will eventually die out. ;)
Be prepared people!
Rumor has it that the Supreme Court is going to stay the Electorial Vote set for December 15, 2008 and insist that Obama prove his citizenship and eligibility to be President of the United States of America on Friday, December 5, 2005, which he cannot do.
One Supreme Court Lawyer, name withheld to protect him, said this is about to happen, and the White House has known all along that Barack Hussein Obama was not eligible to be President, but there was nothing in their power that they could do about it.
In fact, a White House high up has said that Leo Donofrio’s case is spot on, and will succeed to end the hopes of Barack Hussein Obama from being sworn in as President.
There are rumors of a new election taking place in April, with the winner assuming power in June, with President Bush staying in office until this happens.
Also, there are rumors that the National Guard has been sent out to the big major cities already, or on the way, to prevent any riots from getting out of control, so protect and have a plan ready for your families, and be able to engage it this Friday in as short a time as possible.
The blackout with the Main Stream Media of this case, will not be able to hold this story back on Friday. It has been mentioned on Rush Limbaugh twice that I know of. Once by Rush himself, and then yesterday with his fill in host. When it finally hits the MSM on Friday, you can expect that angry riots may occur. People do not know that this has been going on for well over a month or so, before the actual election took place.
I have noticed lately that Mr. Obama has looked very worried, and troubled. He knows what is about to happen. He has to know. I have held off making this post until now because I did not know what was going to happen, but the rumors that the Stay is going to happen need to be told and we need to protect our families should this get out of control.
The Supreme Court, thank our Lord, is going to protect our Constitution on Friday. Obama’s election is about to be overturned. Get ready.
I like the planned parenthood pamphlet. There is no need for families in the USA to have 10 kids. We’re not an agrarian society – we’re a mini-mall society. Why not have 2 or three really good kids and leave the mass-production to the car companies.
Hal, what disagreement do you have with the pamphlet exactly?
1.) That a person who has more than two children is “selfish”?
2.) That it makes a mockery out of a person who has more than 2 children by comparing them to clams and chickens?
3.) That it blames large families for “killing the planet”?
4.) That it accuses large families of pigging all of the earth’s resources?
5.) That it blames large families for some mysterious future doom to America?
6.) That it claims that large families make people mean less?
7.) That it says that the only way that you can have a large family and be worth being congratulated is if you have adopted.
Which of these points do you personally disagree with?
By the way, I see absolutely no indication that this pamphlet was trying to ‘protect girls from being devalued’. It could have easily made that point without bringing the earth’s resources into the equation, couldn’t it have?
The point about the family name was the last point mentioned, and that was about making people “mean less” when you have “too many people”.
Incidentally, it never makes a mention of whether one would choose to adoptM a boy over a girl, did it? Interesting.
The whole thing was about population control, Hal. It’s obvious as the nose on your face, and I know that you as a lawyer can read it well enough to understand that. Come on! :-)
I think it’s immoral to “try for a boy.” It devalues girls.
Do you think it’s immoral to abort a girl because you wanted a boy?
Why not have 2 or three really good kids and leave the mass-production to the car companies.
Posted by: Yo La Tengo at December 2, 2008 7:21 PM
First, “Why not have 2 or three really good kids…” What the heck does that even mean? ALL my kids are “really good.” Second, yeah, the car companies are doing a great job, let’s leave it to them. Can you say “stupid?”
Hal, do you think the pamphlet sounds “pro-choice”?
Bethany, I favor voluntarily “population control.” I am worried about the “population explosion.”
The whole point about being “congratulated for being able to afford a large family” and the whole world having to pay for your family was odd to me.
And who congratulates people on their fertility, that seemed odd.
I don’t think it’s quite correct to say that this family “will kill us all,” that was a bit over the top.
I guess I’m on a “tone” kick these days, but the pamphlet seemed immature an needlessly confrontational. The message (Let’s not have more kids than we otherwise want just so you can have a son)is okay, but I wasn’t impressed with the effectiveness of it all.
Yeah I agree with you it was over the top, and especially for people who consider themselves pro-choice.
I really don’t think there’s anything voluntary about making someone decide not to have children by frightening them or making them feel guilty about it. I think that is coercion. And I’m glad you I can agree with you about the tone…it was very confrontational. We can at least agree on that! :)
No, Hal, it’s just a really crappy pamphlet.
People try all the time for girls too, it’s not about devaluing any particular sex.
Jill,
Thank you for all you do!!! Have you heard about this great testimony? Did you see the video? Sing a little louder is a testimony shared by a German Jew who watched from his church each week trains carrying Jews into a concentration camp. As a church, they decided to just sing a little louder because they did not want to get involved with what was happening. Many years later, as he listened to a woman share her testimony here in America; he wept and stated the same thing is happening here in America as it did in Germany. Christians have learned to just sing a little louder regarding abortion. If the slaughter of millions of innocent babies does not get the church to act, what will? For more information or to view the video, go to http://operationvoice.org
But I would like to know your thoughts on my 7:26 question. If it’s immoral and devaluing to girls to try for a boy because you wanted a girl, wouldn’t it be logical that it would also devalue girls to abort a girl based on the fact that you wanted a boy?
At least when someone decides to give birth to a girl even when you were wanting a boy, they weren’t saying her life was so worthless that she could be killed for it.
And people almost always learn to love whatever sex they end up with anyway. They learn!
With my second baby, I wanted a boy during the whole pregnancy, and ended up having a girl. I had imagined having a house full of boys with toads in their pockets and playing in the dirt, playing cowboys and robbers, etc. It wasn’t that important to me that it be a boy, but I thought it would be great, since I already had a boy and knew how precious he was.
I ended up being delighted that I didn’t get what I “wanted”! It’s amazing how seeing that little baby in person changes your mind! No devaluation here…my daughter is just as wanted and loved as any other child, and I wouldn’t trade her for the world. If I had aborted her for being a girl, that would be a different story.
Lauren, I think it is more often about trying to have a son. (thus, the comment about the family name). It’s less an issue now than in the 70s and before. Maybe the attitudes changed.
I am worried about the “population explosion.”
Posted by: hal at December 2, 2008 7:35 PM
Hal – are you worried about the converse?
You’re wondering if we’ll trip the K-line, but I think your fears are contrary to the evidence.
Also, I personally know a couple who kept trying for a girl because they had all boys. 2 tries using IVF. They won’t discuss the results of those tries or whether there were gender selective abortions.
boy am I ever glad I produced FOUR children who will rapidly use up all the oxygen and food on the planet.
Let see here: I have among my friends the following:
family#1 – 3 children
family#2 – 9 children
family#3 – 6 children
family#4 – 5 children
family#5 – 4 children
family#6 – 8 children
family#7 – 7 children
family#8 – 8 children
family#9 – 4 children
family#10- 4 children
Total= 58 children who are gobbling up the poor earth’s resources. I love it! whooo hooo!
I think the birth certificate madness is not a serious issue or even worthy of comment. However, the Senator’s response made no sense. The voters have spoken would not be a legitimate response if there was indeed a rational reason to question President-elect Obama’s citizenship.
The “rational reasons” are that (1) Obama’s produced nothing but a 2007 computer print-out of some limited birth information, (2) Obama’s refused to release the 1961 original certificate identifying the hospital and doctor, (3) Hawaii law permits someone born outside the U.S, to register the birth in Hawaii, (4) Obama and his sister disagree as to which Hawaii hospital he was born in (5) Obama’s step-grandma in Kenya allegedly says she witnessed his birth there, (6) Obama spent much of his childhood living outside the U.S. in Indonesia and elsewhere and (7) Obama won’t release any of his college/law school records in which he might have revealed his actual place of birth.
And many more. Were Obama anyone else, he’d have been deported by now.
And many more. Were Obama anyone else, he’d have been deported by now.
Posted by: The Raving Atheist at December 2, 2008 8:13 PM
well if these things are all true then I’d agree. You could always deport him to Canada, apparently we will take anyone and he just might become our Prime Minister. Hell, looks like we will have 3 come Monday.
Patricia, is that supposed to annoy someone? I don’t think it does.
Chris, I’m sure some couples try to have a girl. As I said, attitudes have changed (and it was never universal anyway. My mother always wanted a girl..)
As for worrying about too few people? Never.
Hal,
What’s your take on Western Europe and Japan with the collapsing populations due to a birth rate barely above 1? Are there no potential problems there?
Michael, the earth has added about 3 billion people since I was born. I don’t think we’ll have any problems with too few people. We had enough in 1960 didn’t we? we have billions more now.
The solution is easy; everyone who agrees with Planned Parenthood’s propaganda should report for immediate spaying and neutering so they can’t have any kids. Problem solved.
Anyone ever see the movie “Cheaper By The Dozen?” Not the remake, the original. The scene with the woman from Planned Parenthood is hysterical!
Anyone ever see the movie “Cheaper By The Dozen?” Not the remake, the original. The scene with the woman from Planned Parenthood is hysterical!
Posted by: John Lewandowski at December 2, 2008 9:03 PM
I have that movie! That scene is hilarious. I love it when she runs out of the house in horror.
hal: what’s your point? are you aggravated?
**I love the point about how the rest of the world of the world pays for the hospitals, schools etc. as if the parents of large families DON’T pay taxes! Yes that’s right, none of my friends pays taxes!
**I love how the large families that I grew up with, all the Dutch Catholic families that had 12, 15 or 18 children have succeeded in “killing” the world today. As far as I know, I’m still alive.
** I note that the US could use more “growthmania’ as it is barely maintaining a population at replacement levels. In fact, it’s quite possible that the declining population throughout the world may be one of the causes of the serious economic decline. 100’s of millions of missing consumers and workers surely must have an impact.
How long, Lord?
How long?
Overpopulation is a MYTH. I have a cousin with five children — his youngest will be 3 tomorrow, his oldest will be 13 in 12 or 13 days. Guess they’re using up resources? *rolling eyes*
John: the books are hilarious. My daughter has read and reread that section:
The afternoon that Mrs. Mebane arrived at our house, all of us children were as usual, either upstairs in our rooms or playing in the backyard. Mrs Mebane introduced herself to Mother.
“It’s about birth control,” she told Mother.
“What about it?” Mother asked, blushing.
“I was told you’d be interested.”
“Me?”
“I’ve talked to your friend, Mrs. Bruce, and she was certainly interested.”
“Isn’t it a little late for her to be interested?” Mother asked.
“I see what you mean, Mrs. Gilbreth. But better late than never, don’t you think?”
“But she has eight children,” said Mother.
Mrs. Mebane blanched, and clutched her head.
“My God,” she said. “Not really.”
Mother nodded.
“How perfectly frightful. She impressed me as quite normal. Not at all like an eight-child woman.”
“She’s kept her youth well,” Mother conceded.
“Ah, there’s work to be done, all right,” Mr. Mebane said. “Think of it, living here within eighteen miles of our national birth control headquarters in New York City, and her having eight children. Yes, there’s work to be done, Mrs. Gilbreth, and that’s why I’m here.”
“What sort of work?”
Mother decided at this point that the situation was too ludicrous for Dad to miss, and that he’s never forgive her if she didn’t deal him in.
I LOVE Cheaper by the Dozen. The original. I will have to put in the Blockbuster queue!! :)
Posted by: Kristen at December 2, 2008 7:26 PM
Calling me stupid does not add cred. to your argument, nor does it reflect well on what a generally nice person you prob. are outside of that comment.
I simply think child-rearing is an art form that is when practiced in such a way that values quality over quantity. Its hard to give enough attention to a kid if you’ve got ten other kids competing for that attention.
Hal: “I think it’s immoral to “try for a boy.” It devalues girls.”
Bethany: Do you think it’s immoral to abort a girl because you wanted a boy?
Good discussion – if ever there was a good question about elective abortion, this is it.
To answer Bethany’s question, yes, I think it’s immoral to abort a girl because you wanted a boy. I don’t think it should be illegal, but I do think it’s immoral.
“You can’t even be congratulated on being able to afford five children, because you’re not paying for them. Oh, you provide their food and clothing and shelter, but the rest of the world pays for their roads, schools, hospitals, air, water …”
Okay, this was indeed silly. The same could be said of parents that just had one kid, in that case.
The 70’s was a “down” decade versus the 60’s, 80’s and 90’s – it’s a good question about how the 00’s will be remembered. Anyway, less inclusionism and pessimism more held sway then (for better or worse, depending on one’s viewpoint), and attitudes do change.
Total= 58 children who are gobbling up the poor earth’s resources. I love it! whooo hooo!
Patricia, if you think that saying this somehow helps your side and/or your position, you’re wrong.
Total= 58 children who are gobbling up the poor earth’s resources. I love it! whooo hooo!
Patricia, if you think that saying this somehow helps your side and/or your position, you’re wrong.
Posted by: Doug at December 2, 2008 11:35 PM
somehow that was EXACTLY the comment I was expecting….lol
it’s funny about the last paragraph too> “Families mean little unless people mean much..”
Well they got their wish didn’t they? Today there is really no such thing as a family – the individual and his/her rights are paramount.
Take Danielle for instance, who believes that the womans right to abort is paramount. Presumably this would apply to a married woman who should be allowed to abort regardless of what the father believes should happen to his child.
It would be inconsistent for any person who supports abortion to believe that aborting a child over sex is wrong. If you can abort a child because that baby isn’t convenient, or has a cleft palate, a club foot, Down Syndrome, why not because the baby is female?
And we see very few feminists opposing this in the Third World – why? Because first of all they don’t have a moral leg to stand on. Telling certain ethnic groups they can’t abort females while we abort babies over here for lesser reasons such as convenience smacks of western snobbery.
But secondly, and more importantly they know that if abortion isn’t right in one circumstance then maybe people will start to consider it isn’t right in other circumstances and then abortion just might not be right at all. The feminists just don’t want to lose something they consider as the centerpiece of women’s rights -even though 100’s of millions of their sisters are going to their deaths. We always knew the proabort liberals were truly concerned about the welfare of women.
Calling me stupid does not add cred. to your argument, nor does it reflect well on what a generally nice person you prob. are outside of that comment.
I simply think child-rearing is an art form that is when practiced in such a way that values quality over quantity. Its hard to give enough attention to a kid if you’ve got ten other kids competing for that attention.
When they’re not all stuck in public school all day, there’s plenty of time for all.
To answer Bethany’s question, yes, I think it’s immoral to abort a girl because you wanted a boy. I don’t think it should be illegal, but I do think it’s immoral.
Thanks for answering, Hal.
I simply think child-rearing is an art form that is when practiced in such a way that values quality over quantity. Its hard to give enough attention to a kid if you’ve got ten other kids competing for that attention.
This is quite frankly, a bigoted and intolerant view of large families thank-you very much! It implies that these parents are bad parents or maybe just stupid for somehow not realizing this as a fact.
Well in fact, generally speaking the parents of large families tend to be well organized and good time managers.
I would also like to point out that the children are not all the same age – that is they don’t have 10 eight-year olds running around the house at the same time. The grow into their families! They might have 10 children ranging in age from 23 years old to 10 months. The older children often help out – alot.
I had only 4 children but my oldest, my son at 10 years of age knew how to cook and knew how to diaper a baby.
Amazingly, there are also TWO parents and both are often very invested in the family, especially the father.
Thirdly, unlike large families of the past who simply had babies without really knowing much about how their sexuality worked, today’s parents of large families have the means to help them space their children. My friend who just had her 9th child has 4 years between her 8th and 9th child. They chose not to have any more children for a time for various personal reasons. So they used NFP to space their children.
Mr Tengo you need a serious attitude adjustment.
Patricia, excellent post.
Patricia,
Good points. Also, something that I have noticed with most larger families — how the siblings learn to share and help each other out and how excited they are when a new brother or sister enters the family! Love!
I’ve been on both sides of the issue.
My mother only had me, and I was raised an only child.
My father and my step mom have 7 kids including me.
Though my siblings didn’t get to do all the “stuff” that I did, they grew up with each other and wouldn’t trade any sibling for the world.
All of my adult siblings are happy and well adjusted. One is a designer and one is getting her undergrad in pre-law. My teenage brother is a typical teenager, but he’s a good kid. My 9 year old sister is brilliant and warm. My 3 yr old sister is happy as can be, and all of her older siblings love her. And finally, my baby brother is the absolute light of my family’s eye. He is the most bubbly, wonderful child anyone could ask for.
My dad and step mom weren’t “trying for a boy” but they sure are happy that they have each and every one of their children.
Total= 58 children who are gobbling up the poor earth’s resources. I love it! whooo hooo!
“Patricia, if you think that saying this somehow helps your side and/or your position, you’re wrong.”
somehow that was EXACTLY the comment I was expecting….lol
Lesforlife: How long, Lord?
How long?
I don’t know, but some men have been telling women that the above is six inches for a long time….
Patricia,
Good points. Also, something that I have noticed with most larger families — how the siblings learn to share and help each other out and how excited they are when a new brother or sister enters the family! Love!
Posted by: Eileen #2 at December 3, 2008 8:55 AM
absolutely. In fact, in China, there are huge problems with the single child “emperors” that are so spoiled and coddled that they don’t know how to get along with anyone. I would think being an only child, a very lonesome life. It would be difficult knowing once mom and dad are gone that you are all that’s left.
Patricia, I believe most Asian cultures have a very strong extended family bond.
Posted by: Patricia at December 3, 2008 7:14 AM
Coming from someone who is as prone to angry outbursts at seeming strangers on this board i’ll take the fact that you think I need an attitude adjustment as an affirmation that God really does love me and think I’m special just the way I am. Thanks for being the angel to deliver that message!.
I simply think child-rearing is an art form that is when practiced in such a way that values quality over quantity. Its hard to give enough attention to a kid if you’ve got ten other kids competing for that attention.
I don’t think that saying ” I don’t want 10 kids and I think that for me that is wasteful is bigoted. Go – have 10 kids. I’m sure you love them. Unlike people who want to take away the rights of gay men and lesbians to raise kids, I’m not about to keep a straight person from having 10 kids.
Posted by: Bethany at December 3, 2008 6:45 AM
I think its funny that you stake out “public schools” as being this horrible place. Yet I know more fradulent, wasted-lives that came from the private\catholic school system than I ever knew from my high school.
This is not to say that all public schools are academies of great knowlege, but lets compare this factoid. My high school (public ) had 35 + national merit finalists, the private high schools in town had a combined ten, even as the larger catholic school had a comparable size to that of my school. We did not universally graduate geniuses, but even the lowliest of student at my school had more ability to analyze and contextualize information than the automatons at the private schools who paid $25,000 for the chance to be brainwashed.