Monday, December 29, 2008

Abortion - Carlin Style ( sorry dudes, but this guy has been rocking my funny bone the last couple days)


Posted by at

1 comment:

Gordon said...

Yes! He has some good points. It think the value of a child is worth more to the state and the church than it is to its own parents. If a child lives, the state has more people to tax in the future, more people to send off to war, more people to become consumers, more people to spread the word of religion and to keep the dream alive. Thus prolife is partly about keeping the tribe alive. The problem we have now in some western countries is that so many people are having fewer kids or having abortions that there is not enough people for the state to grow or there is not enough people to tax to maintain a welfare state or an old age pension plan. Indeed we may not see the same benefits in the future as did the baby boomers during their lifetimes because the baby boomers were large enough to support their own welfare state and their parents pensions plans. But now those baby boomers are getting old and they are a huge chunk of the population that will have to be supported by a working population that is less in number that the increasing number of oldtimers they will have to support. So we try to keep our countries numbers up in places like Europe and North America buy promoting immigration as a way to increase our population and bring skilled workers that will consume and that we can tax to keep the welfare state and our pension plans alive. This is the price we pay for allowing prochoice laws in our country and to be honest immigration will not be able to keep up with the amount of population growth needed to sustain a healthy welfare state. But does that mean we should prohibit abortion in order to spur more population growth so that we can sustain the welfare state? What would Judith Butler say?

January 1, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)