Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Planned Parenthood posting Message-ID: <635@mit-vax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 15-Aug-85 18:34:23 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-vax.635 Posted: Thu Aug 15 18:34:23 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 19-Aug-85 23:59:55 EDT References: <639@ttidcc.UUCP> <10929@rochester.UUCP> <1473@pyuxd.UUCP> <11043@rochester.UUCP> Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe) Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 79 Summary: In article <11043@rochester.UUCP> ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) writes: >Why would a sensible American child or any child for that matter ignore his >parents? Maybe their parents are assholes, Ray. Some people are -- therefore you can conclude that some parents are too. Why do you keep beating this dead horse of kids-listening-to-their-elders? Why? Maybe you grew up and listened to everything everyone told you, but most kids I know are a little more independent. >To blazes with the petty concern of parents wishing to buffer their >children from the horrors of the real world till their old enough to >understand. Case in point: When I was little, my parents said,"Stay away from the deep end, until you know how to swim! You might drown!" (Horrid parents!) My neighbor's parents would get the Ray Seal of Approval. They told their kids,"Don't go to the deep end! There are monsters in it!" I learned to swim early. My neighbors were always afraid of the water. Hmmmm. At least they never had a chance to drown... >But on the whole, the responsibility of children rests on the parents, >it has always worked just fine that way. Oh really? Then how come we have some many messed up kids in this world? They didn't start out that way -- it can't be their fault. What about the kids of the strictest parents who get pregnant or into drug habits? >If, as of late, it is not working out so well, then not only are some >parents to blame, but also the interference outside the home. Ray is telling us: PP exists, therefore teenage sexual activity increases. Had control back to the parents and everything will be "just fine." I reiterate: If kids didn't need guidance, there wouldn't be a planned parenthood! >Someone said, I don't remember who, but I agree whole heartedly, "The >way to destroy a society is to erode its base, which in essence is the >family." This idea is deeply buried in Hebrew/Christian tradition. This is not to say it's wrong a priori, but to point out that it is a cultural assumption. Some families work out, others don't. Some families that "do everything together" are not nearly as close as some families "that never even eat dinner at the same time." The "back to the family" movement may have it's good points, but anyone who believes that it will "save America" is being led by the emotional "standing tall" sensationalism that put Ronnie in office in the first place (not that his opponents were any good...) >I don't give a crap what you or anyone else on the net thinks, but I >personally believe... To use a favorite Kenny Arndt expression: this is the credo of the "willfully stupid." On a more resonable note -- let's try to steer this argument away from blatent sensationalism, emotional argument and personal attacks. Ray, can I see some proof? Can I see some statistics on how planned parenthood has raised teenage sexual activity? Would you be interested in seeing some statistics on how it has lowered teenage pregancy? Or don't you "give a crap?" Let's get serious here. -- Charles Forsythe CSDF@MIT-VAX "Live on time. Emit no evil. Wait! I got that backwards!" -Rev. Wang Zeep