Briefly on the Iraqi Prison Scandal:
My words in this thread will be in the regular weblog font.
[H]ow I wish my countrymen would grow up and stop emotionally overreacting to such excusable nonsense. A few bored and frustrated soldiers (secular idiot-heads that they are) had some sadistic fun with some of Saddam's thugs. So what? If this were peace time, we could get upset about that. But we don't have that luxury ...not with such people. Some things are more important than that American myth that goes "liberty and justice for all" ...all AMERICANS, that is, ...nor all Sadamists, or terrorists, or Nazis. ;-). Someone should remind the liberals of the latter.
I'm absolutely dumfounded by how these liberal IDIOTS over-react as cheap actors. The prison abuse isn't good, but as much as I'd hate to say this, those are terrorists in there. Why do we care about people that want to CHOP OUR HEADS OFF more than about our soldiers and our president?
Anything for political power is how they see it.
The sheer hatred of Republicans that the Democrats have is appalling and absolutely disgusting.
Real Americans know that during wartime these kinds of partisan squabblings are inappropriate. Hence though the Republicans savaged President Roosevelt before Pearl Harbor{1}, after that they put partisan politics aside because they recognized that the security of the republic was at stake and was of much greater importance. I might add that the Democrats of that day if the shoe was on the other foot probably would have done the same thing. But that only highlights just how far off the rails the Democratic leadership (and many rank and file Democrats) have gone.
Let us approach this pragmatically for a moment. What is needed is for President Bush to get the NEA to fund the pictures as "artistic license." I mean, come on: a crucifix in a jar of urine is "art" to these people as are pictures of Our Lady smeared with elephant feces. And of course do not forget about the "free expression" of pornography. Why then in light of these indisputable facts{2} are the pictures of the soldiers humiliating prisoners considered so "scandalous"??? If anything these people should be nominating those soldiers for the equivalent of the "2004 Larry Flynt Freespeech Award" for those photos where they are so clearly "indulging their appetites" right???
It is only a matter of sex so I cannot see why these people are so worked up about it. It is difficult to imagine that if Clinton were still president that this would be considered anything but an odd quirk if not for the fact that these were military people.{3}
That is why Bush should retaliate by getting the NEA to fund these pictures if only to expose these people for the hypocrites that they are.{4} A bunch of little Neros fiddling while Rome burns. I have to wonder if even atrocities like the savage beheading of Nick Berg by subhumans will wake these idiots up. Here it is in a nutshell: WE ARE AT WAR WITH SAVAGES WHO HAVE NO SHRED OF COMMON DECENCY IN THEM!!! My guess is that the liberals seeking to cozy up to these vermin will die with their severed heads still in their rectums because of an unwillingness to wake up, remove their heads, and face up to reality.
Imagine these liberal useful idiots of Satan during WWII. "Oh no, but look at how wonderful Hitler really is, he built the autobahns and helped German economy. Stupid bigoted Americans!" *sigh*.
If these kinds of people were in charge during the Second World War, we would all either be speaking German today or be lampshades. That is the bottom line that these seditionists cannot understand. And yes, I do favour trying the most extreme of these sorts for sedition and throwing them behind bars. Make examples of a few big names and the rest will not be so inclined to spout off with their verbal "aid and comfort to the enemy." But I digress.
Notes:
{1} And this was proper prior to December 7, 1941 I might add.
{2} I refer here to the fact that these talking points are treated as dogma by the liberals.
{3} Obviously anything the Purjurer-in-Chief could have used to denigrate the military would have been used if we are to go by his eight year track record in office.
{4} I am not saying that this would be constitutional of course because it would not be. But controverting the Constitution has become so common the past sixty odd years that what is one more indiscretion - particularly if it would underscore the hypocrisy of the "free speech" crowd???
Thursday, May 13, 2004
In light of the earlier ranting -none of which I retract for an instant lest anyone wonder- it seemed appropriate to focus on more mundane matters such as weblog restoration. Therefore, not long after that post was added -and before I updated that post- the weblogs were recategorized as they once were and the bulk of the ones I had up previously were restored. (Along with some that I had long intended to add but never had being added at that time.) I also spent about three hours completing and formatting the restoration of the archives for Rerum Novarum. They are completed through July 31, 2004 so all that is left to do is the long delayed weblog update. However, I am too tired to do that now. It is however on the agenda before the end of the month as is finishing and blogging some long planned responses to others. As these adjustments will be duplicated on my private weblog so that any future glitches are easily corrected and quickly, all that is left now is to conclude this entry.
I am frankly not in the mood to utilize solemn pomp for these promulgations tonight my friends. I am tired and also quite livid still at what I blogged on earlier. For that reason I will only note here in brief that all adjustments, restorations, additions, and subtractions are approved in perpetuity all things to the contrary notwithstanding.
I am frankly not in the mood to utilize solemn pomp for these promulgations tonight my friends. I am tired and also quite livid still at what I blogged on earlier. For that reason I will only note here in brief that all adjustments, restorations, additions, and subtractions are approved in perpetuity all things to the contrary notwithstanding.
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
On the Death of Nick Berg and the So-Called "Religion of Peace":
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
[WARNING: Any children or those with weak stomachs or sensitive ears, kindly do not read this post. -ISM]
Having noted that, those who are not children and can more readily handle reality, kindly go to these photos courtesy of the Paul Revere Society:
Nick Berg R.I.P
About thirty minutes ago, I was listening to the radio on my way to complete a business transaction when I heard the audio that went along with those pictures. What I heard was a bunch of Islamo-fascists changing to "Allah" while Mr. Berg was screaming. You see, they were sawing his throat with a blade and not apparently a sharp one at that. In a word: they cut his head completely off. I am so angry right now that if those bastards were in my presence I would kill them all without a second thought.
You see my friends, we are in a war here and we are dealing with people who are quite obviously incapable of being reasoned with - people who are less than people but are instead properly styled as "human debris." There is a reason why after mulling over the issue for about four months on this weblog{1} I took the stand I took last year on the war and even to the extent of publicly disagreeing with the Holy Father on that subject in no uncertain terms. Those who are familiar with my work know that I only do such things with the greatest of trepidation. However, these are not ordinary circumstances my friends. This is much like the so-called "homosexual marriage" subject in the realm of being a major determining factor in my paradigm of thought on these matters. Here is how I see the war on terror in a nutshell:
---We are fighting a group of intellectually and emotionally arrested fanatics who have yet to come out of the seventh century. Arab civilization contrary to the ignorant babblings of the media is hardly some fertile ground for philosophy, mathematics, science, and the like. All of their contributions in those areas -significant though they were- were a millennia ago. One commentator astutely noted that "since they gave us the zero, they have given civilization zero" and that sums it up about as well as can be done in a syllabus style statement.
---We are dealing with people who revel in death who do not hesitate to boast about this. We are dealing with people who view innocent children as "infidel subversives" and who have no scruples about killing them. Likewise non-Muslims are viewed. Essentially if they cannot convert you, then you must die. Hence in the most sadistic of "rituals" I heard chanting to "Allah" while a young man's bloodcurdling screams rang out over the airwaves as those bastards, those rats, those vile pieces of human debris cut his throat slowly in sawing motion with a dull blade.
But I suppose we are still going to hear the hollow paens of "involving the UN" in the Iraq situation - the same UN who cannot even run a simple oil for food program without massive corruption. I suppose we are going to still hear the cheap rhetoric of "give peace a chance" and after all, if we simply reason with these people and if we show them we are nice people that they will be nice too and all will be well. No my friends, you do not deal with a rabid disease infested dog that attacks you with kind words or idle threats. You deal with such an animal by shooting it. Likewise, these vile people need to be dealt with. I think stake burning would be appropriate for them.
Now I am sure that there are people who will think that I am doing an aboutface on my position on the death penalty stated on this weblog early on and inculcated at this weblog not a few times since then.{2} I however know for a fact that they are congruent with one another -as I never take public stands on controversial issues without doing a good amount of reflecting first on all possible contingent situations. The Church's directive is that the death penalty must be used judiciously and when no other recourse is possible. I submit my friends that this is one of those cases.
For we cannot negotiate with these bastards. They only want to kill us to appease their twisted view of God. Therefore, we need to incinerate them first. It has been proposed in various forms by others but here is my suggestion: give the populace 72 hours to get the hell out of Dodge and then carpetbomb their stronghold cities (like those inside the "Sunni Triangle"). After that, salt the earth so that nothing will grow. I came within a hair's breadth of wishing these inhumans an eternity in hell today but I will not go that far. But I will pray that they have the most painful of purgatories possible.
Also, I will note here for the record that I am calling the bluff of the hypocrites in the media who go out of their way to defend the silence of the Muslims in this country who are presumably no more represented by these thugs than Catholics or any other group are represented by the worst examples in their respective histories. Here is the call my friends. Those who continue to (i) defame or otherwise demean the "silence" of Pius XII during the Holocaust (ii) defame or otherwise demean the southerners who were silent in the face of Klan or other kinds of violence towards our brothers and sisters of a darker hue or non-WASP ancestry need to stop using the "they are silent out of fear" excuse for American Muslims. It is bullshit and I cannot take it anymore. Therefore, you media hypocrites need to start approaching these issues with consistency. I will give you your only choices here.
You can either (i) call them to the carpet for their negligence or (ii) continue to parrot this partyline and cease and desist from the slanders directed towards Pius XII and the inhabitants of the old pre-1970's south. Otherwise, you have not a whit of credibility with thinking people on any subject whatsoever and deserve any derision you receive now and in the future. Oh and one more thing. Though I am hardly a rabid Bush supporter,{3} the following needs to be said also:
I BLAME THOSE TRYING TO USE INDISCRETIONS FROM THE IRAQ WAR FOR POLITICAL GAIN -SUCH AS JOHN KERRY, EDWARD KENNEDY, AND THE OTHER PARTISAN DEVILCRATS- FOR THE DEATH OF NICK BERG. MAY HIS BLOOD BE ON YOU AND ON YOUR IDEOLOGICAL CHILDREN!!!
I am sure this post has resulted in my losing all but the most diehard of my readers but so be it. This is not a popularity contest and I never say what I say to be popular. Those who would question the tenure of this post or the language used -which I assure you is significantly restrained from what I would like to say- I exhort you to do two things:
1) Review the pictures at the link above.
2) Obtain the audio of Nick Berg's murder and listen to it when viewing the pictures yet again.
If at that point you have not changed your mind on this matter, then I have to question just how human you really are and how concerned you are for real justice. These dogs do not deserve to live for what they have done and they cannot be reasoned with. Therefore, exterminate their sorry asses as a testimony to other would-be Islamofascists. Then wrap their bodies in pig entrails. That is all I have to say on the matter at this time except for a small note to Nick Berg and his family -starting with Mr. Berg himself.
---Nick: be assured of my prayers that you may rest in peace with all the souls of the faithfully departed.
---To Nick's family: may you all receive the comfort you need in this difficult time. I hope that any readers I have left will also offer their prayers for you and your family.
And finally:
---May the animals who murdered Nick Berg be snuffed out and buried in pig entrails.
There is really nothing more to say at this time.
[Update: For those who still do not get it, consider the situation from a couple of years ago with the late journalist Daniel Pearl. Like Nick Berg, he was murdered in the name of "the religion of peace." May his soul rest in peace as well. - ISM 5/12/04 7:25 pm]
Notes:
{1} See the entries preceding the above links in the margin on the war subject. There may well be some in the archives which are not in the margin as well - I cannot at the moment remember one way or the other.
{2} I cannot recall if I blogged on this subject since January -as this humble weblog has not been updated since then. However, this subject was treated on again at least as recently as HERE. Until this weblog is updated again -and it is slated for being done before this month is out- I cannot say with certainty if there are any postings more recent than that.
{3} See this link lest anyone think this is a political grandstand on my part. (I solemnly assure you that it is anything but that.)
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
[WARNING: Any children or those with weak stomachs or sensitive ears, kindly do not read this post. -ISM]
Having noted that, those who are not children and can more readily handle reality, kindly go to these photos courtesy of the Paul Revere Society:
Nick Berg R.I.P
About thirty minutes ago, I was listening to the radio on my way to complete a business transaction when I heard the audio that went along with those pictures. What I heard was a bunch of Islamo-fascists changing to "Allah" while Mr. Berg was screaming. You see, they were sawing his throat with a blade and not apparently a sharp one at that. In a word: they cut his head completely off. I am so angry right now that if those bastards were in my presence I would kill them all without a second thought.
You see my friends, we are in a war here and we are dealing with people who are quite obviously incapable of being reasoned with - people who are less than people but are instead properly styled as "human debris." There is a reason why after mulling over the issue for about four months on this weblog{1} I took the stand I took last year on the war and even to the extent of publicly disagreeing with the Holy Father on that subject in no uncertain terms. Those who are familiar with my work know that I only do such things with the greatest of trepidation. However, these are not ordinary circumstances my friends. This is much like the so-called "homosexual marriage" subject in the realm of being a major determining factor in my paradigm of thought on these matters. Here is how I see the war on terror in a nutshell:
---We are fighting a group of intellectually and emotionally arrested fanatics who have yet to come out of the seventh century. Arab civilization contrary to the ignorant babblings of the media is hardly some fertile ground for philosophy, mathematics, science, and the like. All of their contributions in those areas -significant though they were- were a millennia ago. One commentator astutely noted that "since they gave us the zero, they have given civilization zero" and that sums it up about as well as can be done in a syllabus style statement.
---We are dealing with people who revel in death who do not hesitate to boast about this. We are dealing with people who view innocent children as "infidel subversives" and who have no scruples about killing them. Likewise non-Muslims are viewed. Essentially if they cannot convert you, then you must die. Hence in the most sadistic of "rituals" I heard chanting to "Allah" while a young man's bloodcurdling screams rang out over the airwaves as those bastards, those rats, those vile pieces of human debris cut his throat slowly in sawing motion with a dull blade.
But I suppose we are still going to hear the hollow paens of "involving the UN" in the Iraq situation - the same UN who cannot even run a simple oil for food program without massive corruption. I suppose we are going to still hear the cheap rhetoric of "give peace a chance" and after all, if we simply reason with these people and if we show them we are nice people that they will be nice too and all will be well. No my friends, you do not deal with a rabid disease infested dog that attacks you with kind words or idle threats. You deal with such an animal by shooting it. Likewise, these vile people need to be dealt with. I think stake burning would be appropriate for them.
Now I am sure that there are people who will think that I am doing an aboutface on my position on the death penalty stated on this weblog early on and inculcated at this weblog not a few times since then.{2} I however know for a fact that they are congruent with one another -as I never take public stands on controversial issues without doing a good amount of reflecting first on all possible contingent situations. The Church's directive is that the death penalty must be used judiciously and when no other recourse is possible. I submit my friends that this is one of those cases.
For we cannot negotiate with these bastards. They only want to kill us to appease their twisted view of God. Therefore, we need to incinerate them first. It has been proposed in various forms by others but here is my suggestion: give the populace 72 hours to get the hell out of Dodge and then carpetbomb their stronghold cities (like those inside the "Sunni Triangle"). After that, salt the earth so that nothing will grow. I came within a hair's breadth of wishing these inhumans an eternity in hell today but I will not go that far. But I will pray that they have the most painful of purgatories possible.
Also, I will note here for the record that I am calling the bluff of the hypocrites in the media who go out of their way to defend the silence of the Muslims in this country who are presumably no more represented by these thugs than Catholics or any other group are represented by the worst examples in their respective histories. Here is the call my friends. Those who continue to (i) defame or otherwise demean the "silence" of Pius XII during the Holocaust (ii) defame or otherwise demean the southerners who were silent in the face of Klan or other kinds of violence towards our brothers and sisters of a darker hue or non-WASP ancestry need to stop using the "they are silent out of fear" excuse for American Muslims. It is bullshit and I cannot take it anymore. Therefore, you media hypocrites need to start approaching these issues with consistency. I will give you your only choices here.
You can either (i) call them to the carpet for their negligence or (ii) continue to parrot this partyline and cease and desist from the slanders directed towards Pius XII and the inhabitants of the old pre-1970's south. Otherwise, you have not a whit of credibility with thinking people on any subject whatsoever and deserve any derision you receive now and in the future. Oh and one more thing. Though I am hardly a rabid Bush supporter,{3} the following needs to be said also:
I BLAME THOSE TRYING TO USE INDISCRETIONS FROM THE IRAQ WAR FOR POLITICAL GAIN -SUCH AS JOHN KERRY, EDWARD KENNEDY, AND THE OTHER PARTISAN DEVILCRATS- FOR THE DEATH OF NICK BERG. MAY HIS BLOOD BE ON YOU AND ON YOUR IDEOLOGICAL CHILDREN!!!
I am sure this post has resulted in my losing all but the most diehard of my readers but so be it. This is not a popularity contest and I never say what I say to be popular. Those who would question the tenure of this post or the language used -which I assure you is significantly restrained from what I would like to say- I exhort you to do two things:
1) Review the pictures at the link above.
2) Obtain the audio of Nick Berg's murder and listen to it when viewing the pictures yet again.
If at that point you have not changed your mind on this matter, then I have to question just how human you really are and how concerned you are for real justice. These dogs do not deserve to live for what they have done and they cannot be reasoned with. Therefore, exterminate their sorry asses as a testimony to other would-be Islamofascists. Then wrap their bodies in pig entrails. That is all I have to say on the matter at this time except for a small note to Nick Berg and his family -starting with Mr. Berg himself.
---Nick: be assured of my prayers that you may rest in peace with all the souls of the faithfully departed.
---To Nick's family: may you all receive the comfort you need in this difficult time. I hope that any readers I have left will also offer their prayers for you and your family.
And finally:
---May the animals who murdered Nick Berg be snuffed out and buried in pig entrails.
There is really nothing more to say at this time.
[Update: For those who still do not get it, consider the situation from a couple of years ago with the late journalist Daniel Pearl. Like Nick Berg, he was murdered in the name of "the religion of peace." May his soul rest in peace as well. - ISM 5/12/04 7:25 pm]
Notes:
{1} See the entries preceding the above links in the margin on the war subject. There may well be some in the archives which are not in the margin as well - I cannot at the moment remember one way or the other.
{2} I cannot recall if I blogged on this subject since January -as this humble weblog has not been updated since then. However, this subject was treated on again at least as recently as HERE. Until this weblog is updated again -and it is slated for being done before this month is out- I cannot say with certainty if there are any postings more recent than that.
{3} See this link lest anyone think this is a political grandstand on my part. (I solemnly assure you that it is anything but that.)
Points to Ponder:
We at Rerum Novarum found Ourselves while working on template restoration wondering when a good friend of our friend Pete Vere (Shawn Tribe) would begin blogging again. His take on several issues being akin to what has been expressed on this humble weblog is but one reason that We wonder about this. Another reason is that his eastern sensibilities provided a different way of viewing subjects rather than through the stock overly Latin way common to the majority of Catholics. (Even those not affected by so-called "traditionalist" outlooks.)
Though We have checked on occasion over the months, his weblog is still without an update since October 27, 2002. We therefore post this as some points to ponder on matters liturgical and exhort those who know this individual well to encourage him to again take up the blogging discipline anew. But without further ado, here are the points to ponder for today:
One of the things I have been trying to point out is that in the post-Tridentine Western church, we have what seems a uniquely Roman attitude that there is only one way to do things -- that there ought to be one Mass, etc. It is reflected in the tensions which already exist between communities of the indult, of the reform of the reform, and of the modern trendy liturgical circles with each other. Historically, it is represented in the negative bias which even the likes of the great Dom Gueranger expressed in relation to the Oriental and Byzantine liturgies. Even now there are many Western Catholics who view Byzantine Catholicism as somehow "funny", "odd", "eccentric" or even inferior -- yes, I have heard that claim made by some hardline traditionalists. It is reflected when parish priests get concerned because some people wish to receive on the tongue, or kneeling, or by making a sign of the cross first, etc. They feel the people must be catechized to all receive in the same way; they view this varied devotional practise as somehow a disunity in the Body of Christ. Each of these represent an attitude that there must be one way of doing things.
But what effect has this stab at homogeneity had? Has it been unifying? It would seem not since we have a situation where people are segregated in the ways suggested. Is the solution to allow a multiplicity of rites again? Not in and of itself, no. Really that is a separate, but not unrelated issue. It should not be said that I am proposing a multiplicity of rites as a means to greater unity in the Church. For myself, the harmonious co-existence of rites would be a *fruit* of greater unity in the Church. The point was initially raised in response to those who were hesitant to have changes applied to the 1962 missal. In response I pointed out that there was no absolute necessity that everyone must celebrate the 1962 missal with these changes, nor that everyone must use the 1962 missal as is, nor that there wasn't room for the 1965 missal and certainly not that all must use the Pauline missal. In short, that there is room in the Church's tradition, past and present, for unity in diversity; for legitimate liturgical variation. The East has always had this variance and it continues to serve them in the present day...
I should take a minute to point out that when I speak of liturgical variation, I am not speaking of, nor including do-it-yourself liturgies...
What we need to most establish is a change in what seems a uniquely Roman attitude in favour of homogeneity. It is that attitude, I think, that is the cause of the segregation and ghettoization in the Church. The mere presence of a multiplicity of rites is not the cause of this; it merely aggravates it (just as does homogeneity) given that climate. [Shawn Tribe: From Blog of a Byzantinesque Latin circa August 14, 2002]
We at Rerum Novarum found Ourselves while working on template restoration wondering when a good friend of our friend Pete Vere (Shawn Tribe) would begin blogging again. His take on several issues being akin to what has been expressed on this humble weblog is but one reason that We wonder about this. Another reason is that his eastern sensibilities provided a different way of viewing subjects rather than through the stock overly Latin way common to the majority of Catholics. (Even those not affected by so-called "traditionalist" outlooks.)
Though We have checked on occasion over the months, his weblog is still without an update since October 27, 2002. We therefore post this as some points to ponder on matters liturgical and exhort those who know this individual well to encourage him to again take up the blogging discipline anew. But without further ado, here are the points to ponder for today:
One of the things I have been trying to point out is that in the post-Tridentine Western church, we have what seems a uniquely Roman attitude that there is only one way to do things -- that there ought to be one Mass, etc. It is reflected in the tensions which already exist between communities of the indult, of the reform of the reform, and of the modern trendy liturgical circles with each other. Historically, it is represented in the negative bias which even the likes of the great Dom Gueranger expressed in relation to the Oriental and Byzantine liturgies. Even now there are many Western Catholics who view Byzantine Catholicism as somehow "funny", "odd", "eccentric" or even inferior -- yes, I have heard that claim made by some hardline traditionalists. It is reflected when parish priests get concerned because some people wish to receive on the tongue, or kneeling, or by making a sign of the cross first, etc. They feel the people must be catechized to all receive in the same way; they view this varied devotional practise as somehow a disunity in the Body of Christ. Each of these represent an attitude that there must be one way of doing things.
But what effect has this stab at homogeneity had? Has it been unifying? It would seem not since we have a situation where people are segregated in the ways suggested. Is the solution to allow a multiplicity of rites again? Not in and of itself, no. Really that is a separate, but not unrelated issue. It should not be said that I am proposing a multiplicity of rites as a means to greater unity in the Church. For myself, the harmonious co-existence of rites would be a *fruit* of greater unity in the Church. The point was initially raised in response to those who were hesitant to have changes applied to the 1962 missal. In response I pointed out that there was no absolute necessity that everyone must celebrate the 1962 missal with these changes, nor that everyone must use the 1962 missal as is, nor that there wasn't room for the 1965 missal and certainly not that all must use the Pauline missal. In short, that there is room in the Church's tradition, past and present, for unity in diversity; for legitimate liturgical variation. The East has always had this variance and it continues to serve them in the present day...
I should take a minute to point out that when I speak of liturgical variation, I am not speaking of, nor including do-it-yourself liturgies...
What we need to most establish is a change in what seems a uniquely Roman attitude in favour of homogeneity. It is that attitude, I think, that is the cause of the segregation and ghettoization in the Church. The mere presence of a multiplicity of rites is not the cause of this; it merely aggravates it (just as does homogeneity) given that climate. [Shawn Tribe: From Blog of a Byzantinesque Latin circa August 14, 2002]
Monday, May 10, 2004
Points to Ponder:
It seems appropriate to use this entire entry so that is what we will do here...
This is truly and frighteningly evil. From The Chronicle of Higher Education - Oh, what we have wrought:
In many parts of Asia, that advice [favoring male offspring] appears to have stuck. Centuries later, a strong preference for sons persists, enhanced by technology that increasingly allows parents to realize their desires. Amniocentesis and ultrasound can easily identify the sex of a fetus, and sex-selective abortion has become an everyday practice. Daughters who are born are frequently given up, and thousands are adopted out of the country every year. On the horizon are inexpensive sperm-sorting techniques that will guarantee a son even before conception. New technology, of course, is not the only factor; in some rural areas, old-fashioned female infanticide still lingers.
The reasons for the persistence of offspring sex selection, and the exact numbers of pregnancies involved, have been hotly debated since the early 1990s, when the economist Amartya Sen called attention to the phenomenon of "missing women." By some social scientists' measure, more than 100 million females are now missing from the populations of India and China.
For example: in 1996, the ratio of boys to girls (aged 1 - 4) was 121 boys for every 100 girls. Do you have any reason to believe that this is not a ticking time bomb?
If ever there was proof that abortion targets women, here it is. Women, you've been tricked into supporting a genocide that is wiping out your sisters (sororicide) at a rate far higher than your brothers, and yet you support the very evil that has you squarely in its crosshairs.
On the other side, without providentially even ratios, there are a lot of men out there without hope of a mate. Rather than fix the problem at its source (stop killing women), supporters of the Sacrament of Abortion will simply advocate killing more males. And gay marriage.
While I subscribe to the theory that if you see ten troubles coming down the road nine are sure to fall in the ditch, I can't see a problem this large as doing anything but hugging the middle of the road. Combine this with the increasing enstupification of large segments of the population (link goes to Fred Reed's latest column) and I think we're looking at a massive, world-wide social failure. [The Mighty Barrister (c. 5/03/04)]
It seems appropriate to use this entire entry so that is what we will do here...
This is truly and frighteningly evil. From The Chronicle of Higher Education - Oh, what we have wrought:
In many parts of Asia, that advice [favoring male offspring] appears to have stuck. Centuries later, a strong preference for sons persists, enhanced by technology that increasingly allows parents to realize their desires. Amniocentesis and ultrasound can easily identify the sex of a fetus, and sex-selective abortion has become an everyday practice. Daughters who are born are frequently given up, and thousands are adopted out of the country every year. On the horizon are inexpensive sperm-sorting techniques that will guarantee a son even before conception. New technology, of course, is not the only factor; in some rural areas, old-fashioned female infanticide still lingers.
The reasons for the persistence of offspring sex selection, and the exact numbers of pregnancies involved, have been hotly debated since the early 1990s, when the economist Amartya Sen called attention to the phenomenon of "missing women." By some social scientists' measure, more than 100 million females are now missing from the populations of India and China.
For example: in 1996, the ratio of boys to girls (aged 1 - 4) was 121 boys for every 100 girls. Do you have any reason to believe that this is not a ticking time bomb?
If ever there was proof that abortion targets women, here it is. Women, you've been tricked into supporting a genocide that is wiping out your sisters (sororicide) at a rate far higher than your brothers, and yet you support the very evil that has you squarely in its crosshairs.
On the other side, without providentially even ratios, there are a lot of men out there without hope of a mate. Rather than fix the problem at its source (stop killing women), supporters of the Sacrament of Abortion will simply advocate killing more males. And gay marriage.
While I subscribe to the theory that if you see ten troubles coming down the road nine are sure to fall in the ditch, I can't see a problem this large as doing anything but hugging the middle of the road. Combine this with the increasing enstupification of large segments of the population (link goes to Fred Reed's latest column) and I think we're looking at a massive, world-wide social failure. [The Mighty Barrister (c. 5/03/04)]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)