Ted Rall for February 22, 2012

  1. Ishikawa  gun
    AdmNaismith  about 12 years ago

    And crime would be A LOT higher, according to ‘Freakonomics’.

     •  Reply
  2. Swc1
    SaltWaterCroc  about 12 years ago

    Interesting – they don’t support contraception or abortion, yet they are against government health care for children. Guess they are either for Swift’s Modest Proposal or just want a large underclass of available workers. I’m sure the gates and guards to the condo will keep the riff-raff out.

     •  Reply
  3. Dgp 61
    DavidGBA  about 12 years ago

    Most guys loose that many potential children a day.

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    SClark55 Premium Member about 12 years ago

    I guess he’s saying, good thing they were aborted cuz they’d be unemployed? What a shame, a bigger drag on the economy. Do you think it occurs to this guy (or Rall) that some of them just might have been entrepreneurs? Inventors? Life is so dreary, isn’t it? More people just means more unemployed.

     •  Reply
  5. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  about 12 years ago

    Half of all fertilized eggs do NOT attach to the uterus and are “aborted”. So the number is actually, and by “nature” , WAY more, and the world would be a lot more over-populated if not for that. When all are employed and NOT ONE SINGLE CHILD remains out there up for adoption, the “lifer” argument MIGHT hold some honest introspection.

     •  Reply
  6. Puga
    blanche64  about 12 years ago

    republicans want no goverment regulation until it comes to women’s bodies. who’s gonna pay for all those required ultrasounds, i wonder

     •  Reply
  7. Klinger1
    walruscarver2000  about 12 years ago

    If a fertilized human egg is a child, does that mean I had chicken for breakfast this morning?

     •  Reply
  8. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  about 12 years ago

    Virginia is trying to enforce invasive NON-NECESSARY medical procedures on women. I suggest they pass a law requiring MEN to have rectal exams and a urethral exam (with a baseball bat?) before males can have sex!

     •  Reply
  9. Me on trikke 2007    05
    pam Miner  about 12 years ago

    Why are republicans so against birth-control?

     •  Reply
  10. Lew. shaved beard jul 11
    leweclectic  about 12 years ago

    Development and Human Productivity—is the Unsustainable Insanity of Human FecundityThe continued fecundity of the human species is not sustainable on this finite planet, this little spaceship we call Mother Earth. If the human species does not find the means and the will to control and limit the number of human beings living upon this planet—at any given time—and thus bring our species into a sustainable symbiotic relationship with Her, then Mother Nature will do it for us…and it will not be pretty.Just do the math of supply and demand. The planet has a limited amount of minerals, both organic and inorganic, and a fixed amount of sustainable organic resources that are either self-sustaining or that we, agriculturally, are able to reproduce each year; but only at a given or fixed quantity over a specific time period or rate. So, increase the demand on those resources by increasing the number of our species (fecundity = more babies) beyond our capacity and ability to maintain and provide a minimal amount of resources needed to sustain the increased number of beings and, WA-la, death occurs at two levels, (1) due to malnourishment brought on by starvation and/or (2) via a diminished or destroyed habitat within a hostile environment.As a side: If we do not limit the number of our species and do not bring that ‘number’ into an environmentally sustainable symbiosis with Mother Nature, there are no “Gods”—real or imagined—that will prevent the emanate demise or our species… if not its extinction. Or, if Human reproduction was a “Gift of a God or Gods” then it is also a Pandora’s box that we must either husbandry carefully or it becomes the Devil’s knife; fulfilling both our carnal and progeny desires while, in unison, destroying us by and through the unleashed fecundity of our foolish, arrogant species.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Ted Rall