NYT Columnist: Ramp Up Government Spending To Keep Lower Classes From Breeding
For eugenics-minded columnists like Charles Blow of the New York Times, 1.3 million aborted babies a year is not enough. After reading his latest column on a "growing crisis among the nation's children," we can only wonder how much death will truly satisfy the progressives and their ilk.
Is the "right" with their "primitive religious concepts" responsible for Roe v. Wade, which opened the floodgates for wholesale slaughter of innocents? Thanks to Blow's lack of journalistic savvy and nuance, we get a chilling look into the diabolical world of atheistic materialism.
Even if you follow a primitive religious concept of punishment for sex, as many on the right seem to do, you must at some point acknowledge that it is the child, not the parent, who will be punished most by our current policies that increasingly advocate for "unborn children" but fall silent for those outside the womb.
This is not how a rational society operates
We have to do a better, more focused job of teaching sex education and providing contraceptive options (kudos here to the administration for moving this month to require insurance companies to provide birth control services to women at no extra cost).
We also have to preserve women's birth options should they become pregnant, including the option not to give birth.
A "rational society" doesn't torch its foundation and then whine when the house is on fire. If children are suffering, and they are, it's because nanny state arsonists have gutted traditional mother-father families and left the tykes at the mercy of socialist policies; policies that have served to make the real exploiters of children richer and richer.
Blow props up his argument with the usual culprits pretending to advocate for children, at the same time condemning them to the bottom of a wastebasket or a life of poverty: Planned Parenthood's Guttmacher Institute, Marian Wright Edelman's Children's Defense Fund, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, ABC News and the World Bank. Their data makes the same never-ending claim that the feds have not spent enough to stop childhood poverty. Really?
These policy setting and supporting groups have duped many people into thinking entitlement programs are the way to success. But there's been no quantifiable increase in poor children's financial health. In fact according to studies by foundations like Annie E. Casey, the situation has gotten worse. The only persons profiting from the scam are those who run the nonprofits and those with whom they engage. They have been feeding at the government grants trough for the last 40 years.
After shelling out trillions for child welfare, birth control and sex education programs, government cupboards are bare. But that doesn't stop "useful idiots" like Blow from brazenly arguing for more.
Now is when we need government to step up and be smart.
This is exactly the wrong time to do what the Republicans would have us do. In their 2012 budget, they propose cutting nutrition programs as part of austerity measures so that we don't leave our children saddled with debt.
Since its inception in 1973 Edelman's CDF has attributed black poverty to government "austerity." But David Horowitz's Discover the Networks website points out "social welfare spending by the federal government had increased by an average of some $25 billion per year, every year, between 1970 and 1995."
Blow sings the same tune Edelman's been piping for the last 40 years: the "growing income inequality" is responsible for childhood poverty which in turn is responsible for the primary social ill -- too many babies being born to the lower classes. Blow blames "conservatives" who are setting records passing laws to restrict abortion."
Despite the self-contradiction and illogic of Blow's opinion piece, it ends on a predictable eugenics note asking, "What kind of society do we want to build, and what kinds of workers, soldiers and citizens should populate that society?" With his advocacy of abortion as a viable solution to poverty Blow sounds like Margaret Sanger when she stated in 1922 "birth control ultimately leads to a cleaner race."
Read more M. Catharine Evans at Potter Williams Report