"Abort all black babies and cut crime"

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Speaking on his daily radio show, William Bennett, education secretary under Ronald Reagan and drugs czar under the first George Bush, said: "If you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose; you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down."

He went on to qualify his comments, which were made in response to a hypothesis that linked the falling crime rate to a rising abortion rate. Aborting black babies, he continued, would be "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international ... 51,00.html

Debbie · Post by **Debbie** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:39 pm

What an idiot.

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:42 pm

It no wonder why we have problems in this country. What a ****ing *******.

Starmax · Post by **Starmax** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:43 pm

Humboldt wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1582351,00.html

they are gonna most deffinately burn that man at the stakes in puplic in the south..................

blebs · Post by **blebs** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:48 pm

I can hear Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the others now.

Starmax · Post by **Starmax** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 12:55 pm

blebs99 wrote:I can hear Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the others now.

yep

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:02 pm

His expanding on a thought that I read in a book that the most honorable Bouncer recommended to me... Freakonomics.

The difference being that what the authors claim that legalized abortion has more than likely reduced crime rates. The argument is something along the lines of.. aborted fetuses or the flip side...if they weren't aborted, were more than likely to grow up in single parent or poorer households. That in and of itself seems a reasonable claim given that most in prison seem to come from the poor end of the spectrum. That said, none of their argument was race based. They never mentioned skin color.

Hey, it's Bill Bennett. Who's really surprised. The guy has always been a hypocrite and a bigot..

Then again, talk radio and some Fox pundits are spinning it that Bennett is being taken out of context. LOL

Starmax · Post by **Starmax** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:05 pm

downhill wrote:His expanding on a thought that I read in a book that the most honorable Bouncer recommended to me... Freakonomics.

The difference being that what the authors claim that legalized abortion has more than likely reduced crime rates. The argument is something along the lines of.. aborted fetuses or the flip side...if they weren't aborted, were more than likely to grow up in single parent or poorer households. That in and of itself seems a reasonable claim given that most in prison seem to come from the poor end of the spectrum. That said, none of their argument was race based. They never mentioned skin color.

Hey, it's Bill Bennett. Who's really surprised. The guy has always been a hypocrite and a bigot..

Then again, talk radio and some Fox pundits are spinning it that Bennett is being taken out of context. LOL

lol yea id have to say i agree with that,,its almost expected from him.........

Bouncer · Post by **Bouncer** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:23 pm

Actually, he was just more or less paraphrasing what Steven Levitt wrote in "Freakonomics". Levitts contention was that the fall in violent crime in the 90's could be linked to the legalization of abortion in the 70's.

Most women who have abortions are younger and in a lower economic class.

Children raised by younger parents from a lower economic class have a greater chance of ending up committing crimes.

Those who become serious criminals tend to start committing more serious crimes between 16-25 years of age.

Therefore,
A) Legalization of abortion leads to fewer children in the profile group likely to become criminals.

B) Thus 16-25 years after abortion becomes legal, the crime rate drops.

None of this is a moral discussion and I am not taking a position on abortion. We're just talking about the numbers.

Since black males are the most likely *group* to end up in the justice system, aborting every black male would (about 16 years later) lead to a reduction of people in the justice system.

Again, I am not taking a position on this. I am simply explaining Levitts theory AND Sessions extension of the theory. Simple math should not be subject to PCness.

I am at pains to ALSO point out that giving every poor child a first class education on par with what more wealthy children recieve would do quite a bit towards lowering the trend as well. As would real job training for their parents. As would parenting training. As would various other factors, up to and including required national service for all males from 18-22 years of age.

It's not as simple as Sessions states, but if we're not willing to be honest about the math, we have a more fundamental issue we need to address first.

Regards,
-Bouncer-
edit: DANG YOU DH For posting while I was writing! I will pm you now and then post a DH is a meanie thread!

major marco · Post by **major marco** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:51 pm

Humboldt wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/international ... 51,00.html

Funny but when I read the "abort all black babies," etc. quote, I was expecting the comment to be attributed to Babs "beautiful mind" Bu$h.

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 1:54 pm

I'm still waiting for one of our local racists to chime in.

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:01 pm

I have my own theories.

Abort all white babies and crime will drop. Do the math.

Release all prisoners that were framed or otherwise illegally incarcerated.

Lock up all the white collar criminals and politicians that get away with crime. Math talks.

Put poor people in positions of power. Let them enforce the laws. More rich people would go to jail, increasing the crime rate. Simple math.

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:03 pm

Hi Norm

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:04 pm

Humboldt wrote:Hi Norm

Hi Humbaldt.

Now that you have a cable connection maybe you can keep up

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:05 pm

Norm wrote:Hi Humbaldt.

Now that you have a cable connection maybe you can keep up

man, I've posted a week's worth in the past hour

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:08 pm

Oh no, another Spammy?

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:09 pm

Norm wrote:Oh no, another Spammy?

Nah, I have a larger p enis

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:10 pm

Humboldt wrote:Nah, I have a larger p enis

lol Big deal!

Who doesn't?

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:11 pm

Norm wrote:lol Big deal!

Who doesn't?

thepieman · Post by **thepieman** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:13 pm

blebs99 wrote:I can hear Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the others now.

well when idiots like that guy give them fuel, well......I hope they ream him a new a-hole

Pie

Bouncer · Post by **Bouncer** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:42 pm

Norm wrote:I have my own theories.

Abort all white babies and crime will drop. Do the math.

Lock up all the white collar criminals and politicians that get away with crime. Math talks.

Put poor people in positions of power. Let them enforce the laws. More rich people would go to jail, increasing the crime rate. Simple math.

All of those are true. None of them are going to happen. Discussing the statistics and economics of abortion or incarceration does not make you a proponent of the idea. You are linking the two. More to the point, if you get what you think you want, we would not even be able to have the discussion at all. We would automatically be socially ostracized for doing so. From one standpoint that may seem like a good thing.

Unfortunately, it is also precisely how we end up with things like abstinence only sex education in schools and intelligent design being taught as if it were science.

We either take the "socially acceptable" view of what may and may not be discussed, or we discuss things honestly. The issue is larger than Sessions. It cuts right to the heart of our ability to have an honest discussion on issues like abortion, crime, sex ed, education, poverty, minorities, the justice system and more.

I understand your sarcastic dismissal of comments you see as inappropriate. I'm trying to make the point to you that that righteous anger is also what drives decisions not to talk about condoms in school. It is "inappropriate" you see.

So, we are either honest about this or we are not. Do you really want to not be honest about this? To sacrifice truth for what is morally convenient?

I don't.

You and I have butted heads before Norm, no doubt about that. But I just don't see you as a person who shrinks from the truth when it's not convenient. I urge you to reconsider.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:49 pm

Bouncer, you misunderstood my post, I think.

I am all for truth, as you know.
I actually do support the statements in the first thread. The math speaks for itself.
However, in order to speak the truth the filpside is also in the equation.

The truth is, if we were to abort all babies from 'any' race the crime rate would drop. That's math, not racist.
Racism is when one side gets to speak while the other side is stifled.

btw - I don't consider this butting heads. I believe in discussing the truth.
All sides of it.

thepieman · Post by **thepieman** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 2:51 pm

Norm wrote:Bouncer, you misunderstood my post, I think.

I am all for truth, as you know.
I actually do support the statements in the first thread. The math speaks for itself.
However, in order to speak the truth the filpside is also in the equation.

The truth is, if we were to abort all babies from 'any' race the crime rate would drop. That's math, not racist.
Racism is when one side gets to speak while the other side is stifled.

btw - I don't consider this butting heads. I believe in discussing the truth.
All sides of it.

kinda thought you were just being sarcastic myself. Mimicing that guy.

Pie

Norm · Post by **Norm** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:01 pm

btw - I didn't read the whole article, only the quote Humboldt posted.

Of course it's true, and of course it should be discussed openly and fairly.
I don't think it's fair pointing the finger at one race, or one sector of society.
The dominant race in our society tends to have better opportunity, education, and a nack for getting away with breaking the law, money talks even better than math..at times.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:18 pm

Bouncer wrote: I am at pains to ALSO point out that giving every poor child a first class education on par with what more wealthy children recieve would do quite a bit towards lowering the trend as well. As would real job training for their parents. As would parenting training. As would various other factors, up to and including required national service for all males from 18-22 years of age.

It's not as simple as Sessions states, but if we're not willing to be honest about the math, we have a more fundamental issue we need to address first.

Regards,
-Bouncer-
edit: DANG YOU DH For posting while I was writing! I will pm you now and then post a DH is a meanie thread!

LOL.....Join the mob!!

The part about education is an excellent point, Tom.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Norm wrote:Bouncer, you misunderstood my post, I think.

I am all for truth, as you know.
I actually do support the statements in the first thread. The math speaks for itself.
However, in order to speak the truth the filpside is also in the equation.

The truth is, if we were to abort all babies from 'any' race the crime rate would drop. That's math, not racist.
Racism is when one side gets to speak while the other side is stifled.

btw - I don't consider this butting heads. I believe in discussing the truth.
All sides of it.

Norm, your point is exactly what Tom alluded to when he mentioned the ideas discussed in Freakonomics.

I think both of you are on the same page.

Starmax · Post by **Starmax** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 4:47 pm

Norm wrote:btw - I didn't read the whole article, only the quote Humboldt posted.

Of course it's true, and of course it should be discussed openly and fairly.
I don't think it's fair pointing the finger at one race, or one sector of society.
The dominant race in our society tends to have better opportunity, education, and a nack for getting away with breaking the law, money talks even better than math..at times.

well i have a question,and im sure it will be justified,but out of curiousity,,what do you mean by Dominant Race?

Sarahnn · Post by **Sarahnn** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:31 pm

major marco wrote:Funny but when I read the "abort all black babies," etc. quote, I was expecting the comment to be attributed to Babs "beautiful mind" Bu$h.

That was a cheap shot. Barbara Bush lost a child once. I am sure the death of any baby resounds within her in a painful way. Have you ever lost a child of your own?

No need to answer, it was a rhetorical question.

triniwasp · Post by **triniwasp** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:36 pm

There wasn't anything racist about what he said, he was hypothesizing. Is he a major dumb ass for making the statment and acting suprised at the outcome? YES! But I truly don't think he's a racist, just an idiot.

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:45 pm

Norm wrote:lol Big deal!

Who doesn't?

oh shiat man I almost sprayed me screen.

Humboldt · Post by **Humboldt** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:51 pm

triniwasp wrote:There wasn't anything racist about what he said, he was hypothesizing. Is he a major dumb ass for making the statment and acting suprised at the outcome? YES! But I truly don't think he's a racist, just an idiot.

Nice title you have there bud.

They must really like you at the office

triniwasp · Post by **triniwasp** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:10 pm

Humboldt wrote:Nice title you have there bud.

They must really like you at the office

I know it

major marco · Post by **major marco** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:35 pm

A true story about Bill abort all black babies Bennett.

Spammy · Post by **Spammy** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:36 pm

****ing Loser

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Spammy wrote:****ing Loser

read the thread spamuel

cho · Post by **cho** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 9:46 pm

triniwasp wrote:There wasn't anything racist about what he said, he was hypothesizing. Is he a major dumb ass for making the statment and acting suprised at the outcome? YES! But I truly don't think he's a racist, just an idiot.

It is a racist statement beacuse he is basically saying all black people are criminals.

"If you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose]

He may not be a racist, but he did make a racist statement.

Hypotheses can be racist statements, like the Hypothesis that black people make better runners because they are more "primitive". That is an inaccurate Hypothesis that goes back to the 1940's and before, as well as a racist statement.

Starmax · Post by **Starmax** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:14 pm

Halle Berry Looks very delighted to be sitting on starmax's lap.

fixed..lol

triniwasp · Post by **triniwasp** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:36 pm

*cho* wrote:It is a racist statement beacuse he is basically saying all black people are criminals.

IMHO his statment was analytical.

Mad_Haggis · Post by **Mad_Haggis** » Sat Oct 01, 2005 11:44 pm

That is harsh...

His career should be over...just someone you don't want to hang out with.

I gotta figure he probably does not like beer as well.

cho · Post by **cho** » Sun Oct 02, 2005 12:00 am

triniwasp wrote:IMHO his statment was analytical.

Even so though, how does that seperate it from being racist comment in your view?
I'm not saying it isn't analytical, the logic behind his thinking has been proven, but it has nothing to do with aborting black babies. It can be proven by aborting any baby of any colour.