Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

College Prof: You Have No Right to More Than One Child
National Catholic Register ^ | 11/02/2015 | Matthew Archbold

Posted on 11/03/2015 12:11:55 PM PST by BlessedBeGod

A philosophy professor at Bowdoin College, Sarah Conly, really misses China's One-Child policy. I mean, really misses it.

She even wrote a book called "One Child: Do We Have a Right to More..." I'm not going to buy that book but she was kind enough to write a column in the Boston Globe putting her anti-human kookiness on display for everyone to see.

In it, she bemoans China ending its one-child policy and asks "Is this really a good thing?" She thinks not.

She writes, "the idea that people should limit the number of children they have to just one is not, I would argue, a bad one, for the Chinese or for the rest of us."

Then you get a lot of blah blah blah nonsense about overpopulation and all that. But then you get to the moral case. She posits that YOU have no right to have more than one child.

Given the damage we are causing, and the suffering we foresee for all those who live after us, it is clear that having more than one child is just something that none of us -- Chinese or American -- has a moral right to do. We have no right to cause great harm to others when we can avoid this without great loss to ourselves... (snip)

Conly does, however, do a good thing here. She unmasks the true agenda of many. For those who might wonder, Hey, whatever happened to freedom of choice, think to yourself that maybe, just maybe, the abortion movement wasn't ever about that. "Choice" was a slogan, a brand to mask their anti-human agenda. It is not freedom they espouse. It is death... (snip)

(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: bowdoincollege; catholic; china; sarahconly
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

1 posted on 11/03/2015 12:11:55 PM PST by BlessedBeGod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

I can see why. No man would want to have more than one child with this militant hag.

2 posted on 11/03/2015 12:16:17 PM PST by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

Was she a first child?


3 posted on 11/03/2015 12:17:08 PM PST by ctdonath2 (Trump/Cruz - Because you gotta win, first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Opinionated Blowhard
Rush Limbaugh's Undeniable Truth #7.

"Feminism was created to give unattractive women access to the mainstream."

4 posted on 11/03/2015 12:18:21 PM PST by PROCON (Proud CRUZader!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

Lead by example, professor.

If there are too many people, you go first.


5 posted on 11/03/2015 12:18:37 PM PST by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

The proper response is ‘Who the F____ do you think you are?’. No other response is needed.


6 posted on 11/03/2015 12:19:13 PM PST by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

Bowdoin College. Home of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. Wonder what he would say.


7 posted on 11/03/2015 12:19:36 PM PST by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

Why one then?
Why not none? Or six? Or any other arbitrary number that fits whatever world view you have?


8 posted on 11/03/2015 12:20:30 PM PST by alancarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

No college professor can shock me anymore.


9 posted on 11/03/2015 12:21:33 PM PST by DungeonMaster (Now I understand why my grandparents quit voting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod
Given the damage we are causing...

So that's a given is it?
Well, then, given that liberals are a scourge on human civilization we should ______________________
___________________________________________________
(fill in the blank. Use more paper if you want).

10 posted on 11/03/2015 12:22:16 PM PST by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

http://www.bowdoin.edu/faculty/s/sconly/
Lecturing her fellow Americans on “morality”.
Blow me professor.


11 posted on 11/03/2015 12:22:22 PM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

If she was really an intellectual she’d do some cursory examination of China’s demographic data and realize what a damned fool she sounds like.


12 posted on 11/03/2015 12:23:36 PM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice
Blow me professor.
U R a gulton for punishment
13 posted on 11/03/2015 12:23:37 PM PST by Paul46360
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod
The one child policy in China was not kind to females. The sex ratio among newborns in China is 120:100 (male:female) today in part because so many would-be parents choose to abort female fetuses.
14 posted on 11/03/2015 12:23:44 PM PST by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

A face not even a mother could love


15 posted on 11/03/2015 12:23:55 PM PST by Paul46360
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

If life isn’t sacred, then no life is sacred; woman.
Remember that.


16 posted on 11/03/2015 12:24:22 PM PST by vpintheak (A Free Man! Death before disarmament!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Oh, I missed this first time and don’t want you to miss out:

“For this reason, it can be permissible for governments to regulate the number of children we have, as long as they do that in ways that don’t violate rights.”

That’s priceless. heh


17 posted on 11/03/2015 12:24:59 PM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Opinionated Blowhard

https://paw.princeton.edu/issues/2013/05/15/pages/8131/RR-AuthorNew.jpg

Conly argues that more aggressive measures can be justified. A full ban on cigarettes, she says, should be considered.

When to employ coercive measures should be determined on a case-by-case basis, she says. When the good achieved is obvious, and experience suggests education is not enough to persuade individuals to change their behavior, then a more intrusive approach may be necessary.

Conly’s argument is based on her judgment of human behavior. In the past, philosophers have worked from the assumption that humans are rational beings. Conly began to question this assessment during a break from academic life.

“The more time I spent out of academics,” she says, “the more I thought [about] the classical philosophical picture of humans as rational agents who typically see what they want to do and choose the right act in order to reach their ends — [I realized] that picture was just wrong.”

Oftentimes people don’t make the right choices, she says, especially when it is not obvious what the long-term impact will be. If you drink a 32-ounce soda, for example, you are not going to die tomorrow; but sustained consumption of high-sugar drinks could lead to severe health problems.


18 posted on 11/03/2015 12:27:09 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Paul46360

She takes out her teeth, prolly has a flat head for my can of beer. Are you ready for some football?!

I’m an ape man, an ape ape man, I’m a ape man ...


19 posted on 11/03/2015 12:28:00 PM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod

Sez you, professor Hag. Move to China.


20 posted on 11/03/2015 12:28:04 PM PST by WKUHilltopper (And yet...we continue to tolerate this crap...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson