Usenet.com

www.Usenet.com

Group Index

Talk Thread Archive from Usenet.com

<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->

Re: Medicine is useless



In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
George Conklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>"Herman Rubin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> DWood78828 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>Subject: Re: Medicine is useless
>> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  (Herman Rubin)

>> >>I do not see how it is not responsive.  Contraceptive measures
>> >>have been easily available for the whole period; they are not
>> >>used by most peasant women until they have had lots of children.

>> >Herman, have you ever examined the reasons that certain groups of women
>do not
>> >use contraceptives?  Among the reasons, are religious views, spousal
>> >opposition, economic, infant and toddler mortality.

Or just the belief that they should have a half dozen
children?  This seems to be the major one in India.


>> >They donot keep having them for the fun of it, despite what you think.


>> I never claimed that.  But those who attempt to use the
>> arguments usually used to claim that mere education or
>> availability or a combination of the two are sufficient
>> to get women not to have children are just wishing.


>   Wrong again Herman.  Your libertarian theory has now given away to
>Fascism.

I see nothing fascist about my views.  They can go on having
the children if they want, but I do not have to support them
or their children.  This is where libertarian views come in;
nobody should be forced to provide food, clothing, shelter, 
or medical care for the benefit of someone else.  This does
not mean ignoring needs, and especially not emergency cases,
but at this time, with massive overpopulation and shortages,
I see the need not to encourage making it worse.  

At any rate, a libertarian cannot support a government policy
of providing any of the "needs" above to all who claim them.
If 5% are poor, there is no problem; private charity is quite
adequate.  If 95% are  poor, there is no good solution; the
situation is likely to get worse if the poor are provided for,
as the ones with ideas will have no resources to carry them out.


-- 
This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558



<-- __Chronological__ --> <-- __Thread__ -->


Usenet.com



Please check out one of the premium Usenet Newsgroup Service Providers below for access to Usenet.