Roberts Demonstrates Contempt for Women

[John Dibble]

If we had more abortions, we'd be more economically sucessful.

Honestly I have to wonder what the hell you're thinking.

[© tweed]

If we had more abortions, we'd be more economically sucessful.

Honestly I have to wonder what the hell you're thinking.

My guess is that he feels a lower population would lead to more economic success.  Of course, under that view, immigration would have to be prohibited too, and sex would have to be regulated, which I doubt he supports.

[A18]

Actually, higher population leads to greater economic progress (per capita, not just aggregate).

Of course, that's a general rule. Having less criminals and welfare whores would strengthen economic progress.

[© tweed]

Actually, higher population leads to greater economic progress (per capita, not just aggregate).

Of course, that's a general rule. Having less criminals and welfare whores would strengthen economic progress.

My above post wasn't my view, but rather my guess of what phnkrocket's views are.

[J. J.]

"Some might question whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good."

some might.  You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a lawyer.  But hey, we can always use a few thousand more.

Let's see if we have this straight.  Roberts questions whether abandoning a child at home at enrolling in law school, of all things, "contributes to the common good."

My guess is that Robert is saying that it's probably not a good thing to have more lawyers.

[angus]

If we had more abortions, we'd be more economically sucessful.

Honestly I have to wonder what the hell you're thinking.

My guess is that he feels a lower population would lead to more economic success.  Of course, under that view, immigration would have to be prohibited too, and sex would have to be regulated, which I doubt he supports.

oops.  I actually thought he was doing sardonism. 


Well, just in case it wasn't clear, I was.

[The Duke]

"nclib demonstrates contempt for logic!"

[TeePee4Prez]

If we had more abortions, we'd be more economically sucessful.

right....we should just stop having children.  They're such a burden and expense.  Brilliant....

Children are an investment in the future, one that feminists completely discount the value of.

Having children AT THE RIGHT TIME are an investment in the future.  Having too many stunts the economic well being of the existing children.  I have seen it myself with my dumbass aunt who decided after she had 4 kids with her first husband that she would have 5 more with her second.  Having seen my older cousins have little educational and stunted social opportunites because they had to mind my aunt's irresponsibilty was sickening.  The older two girls have drug problems and are with bad men.  She should have used birth control.

I also do not think that in a post-industrial economy that having excess amounts of children help the economy.  You need fewer, more educated children rather than lots to work an assembly line.  Children are an investment and a responsibility we must care for as best as possible.  

I do think the feminist movement goes too far at times and I actually agree with Rick Santorum in part on this issue-  it is best to have a parent at home during the child's first few years.  It does not necessarily have to be the woman however.  The reason this is largely not possible is because Reaganomics forces both parents to work.      

[A18]

Real hourly compensation has generally been rising over the last 25 years. Reaganomics has nothing to do with both parents working.