Posted on 05/12/2006 11:52:13 PM PDT by Lurker
In unearthed letter urged President-elect Clinton to 'reform' country
A letter to Bill Clinton written by the co-counsel who successfully argued the Roe v. Wade decision urged the then-president-elect to "eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country" by liberalizing abortion laws. Ron Weddington, who with his wife Sarah Weddington represented "Jane Roe," sent the four-page letter to President Clinton's transition team before Clinton took office in January 1993.
The missive turned up in an exhibit put together by the watchdog legal group Judicial Watch, which has been researching the Clinton administration's policy on the abortion drug RU-486, notes James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web.
Weddington qualified his statement, saying, "No, I'm not advocating some sort of mass extinction of these unfortunate people. Crime, drugs and disease are already doing that. The problem is that their numbers are not only replaced but increased by the birth of millions of babies to people who can't afford to have babies.
"There, I've said it. It's what we all know is true, but we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights, we view any program which might treat the disadvantaged differently as discriminatory, mean-spirited and ... well ... Republican
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Sick.
"The State Boys Rebellion"
I saw this book last week, and it is the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread. When I was a kid in Massachusetts,probably six or seven years old, my Mom told me that they had schools for boys that did not behave themselves, where they lived without their parents. I could not believe such a thing.
Later I figured that she was referring to reform schools [juvenile hall] where kids who actually broke laws were sent. In fact, many of the kids sent to Fernald school were just "bad boys", or slow, or maybe just inconvenient.
Remember how when Bill Bennett exposed this liberal justification of Abortion on his show, simply pointing at the facts...the MSM desperately ducked and tried to pin the race card on him!? It was a serious effort to get him off the air...and silence any discussion of their skeletons in the closet.
In the big picture, what's the difference if it's addressed before or shortly after conception? Once you assert that it's ethical to exercise some control over who gets to be born and live a life and who doesn't, the outcome is the same. If you stop a rape, you might well be stopping a conception, which would be preventing a life which might have been. Does this mean you shouldn't try to stop a rape if you can? Sure, I'm glad I'm here having a life, but if I weren't, it certainly wouldn't make a whit of difference to me whether my life had been prevented shortly before or shortly after conception.
It's not so much that they're the "wrong people", but that having babies before they get their acts together prevents them from ever getting their acts together. It's not that they all need to be prevented from ever having children, but that they need to be prevented from having children too soon. Unfortunately, the very same characteristics that make them unfit parents (and unfit citizens) also make them incapable of using contraception reliably, and incapable of self-restraint.
Yes there are and always have been. H.L. Mencken, whom you quote on your profile page, was one of them.
L
What is your problem?
Come on, you can cough up a few more words - don't be "troll like"...
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.