Yeah,I guess you both are right in your respective points.Jules,I agree about the slippery slope thing totally.Whatever can be done to make the world a better place for all children,no matter how they’re born is important.Education,better housing,safer neighborhoods.More wise parenting techniques.In this case the religous influence is counter-productive to the issues.
Asanta,I hear you.
I tend to latch onto radical ideas alot.I can’t help it.I want results.I keep seeing the muck that is our whole society and it gets frustrating.I know these inner-city ghettos are engineered.I know the system is set up to cordon off the poor from the rest of society.Whatever happens in these areas,it’s already budgeted for way in advance,so the establishment turns a blind eye to it.Whether it’s rural areas or inner-city,these impoverished people are not spoken for.
I can’t compose anymore thoughts,I’m jumbled up.This whole thing leads into so many different directions.

Mriana - 27 September 2008 04:00 PM

I don’t think it is possible to eliminate out proverty.

I think poverty could be eliminated. Given our capitalistic way of life, if every family was provided with the essentials: home, education, health care, etc, that would go a long way toward alleviating some of the issues faced by the poor, thereby creating a more level playing field for all citizens.

I realize there are a whole host of other considerations, and I’m purposely being simplistic, but I think it could be done.

I agree with Shawn that poverty can be eliminated.

Also, I don’t think that all person’s are fit to be parents, and I think that it is a privilege and not a right to have children… children have rights to a decent upbringing that supercede the rights of any irresponsible adult who comes along with working sex organs.  But I also think that wealth and poverty make for an asinine barometer of parent aptitude.  I suppose the idea is to keep poor people’s time free so that they can work as nannies in raising the wealthy people’s children.  That would free up more time for them so that they can be even more negligent themselves.

Next, they’ll want to sterilize atheists.

Shawn - 27 September 2008 07:56 PM

Mriana - 27 September 2008 04:00 PM

I don’t think it is possible to eliminate out proverty.

I think poverty could be eliminated. Given our capitalistic way of life, if every family was provided with the essentials: home, education, health care, etc, that would go a long way toward alleviating some of the issues faced by the poor, thereby creating a more level playing field for all citizens.

I realize there are a whole host of other considerations, and I’m purposely being simplistic, but I think it could be done.

I agree, but who in power is going to allow it to be done?  It hasn’t happened yet.  I’m not saying we can’t do those things, but there is always the snobbish wealthy trying to stop it from happening.

Well, in a Democracy, the People have the Power.

....Don’t they?

I don’t know anymore.

None of us live in a democracy.  But a true democracy would be highly unlikely to direct itself toward such a task as ending poverty in my opinion.  It would take a certain sort of republic, within which the more brilliant and ethical minds could be empowered.  We don’t live in such a place either.

The zeitgeist needs to shift.  Consciousness raising has some potential.