I am still confused about the forms of government/economic systems.
Because Marxism has nothing to do with the use of the military to overthrow and spread the idea of communism. I'm fairly sure that I'm right when I say that the idea of "aggressive communism" was perpetuated by Stalin's late 1940s post WW2 acquisition of the eastern half of Europe and those who followed him after '54 (which I believe was the year of his death). Marx was never a Soviet leader. And if my history's right, he was dead before he could see the USSR.
Who knows what he [Marx] would have thought about how much his ideals were bastardized.June 1995 THE NATIONAL
(not sure if it's a magazine or newspaper but I've seen the same article in a few places)
"[Feklisov] a former KGB officer, said that "he recruited Julius Rosenberg to spy for the Soviet Union in 1943, that he had fifty meetings with Rosenberg, that Rosenberg gave him valuable military information, and that Ethel Rosenberg was aware of her husband's spying but did not participate in intelligence work.
" (Radosh, “Final Verdict”) Feklisov also said that Rosenberg stole the plans for a "friend and foe" device from Emerson Corporation. This device distinguished allied aircraft from enemy aircraft. Julius also stole the proximity fuse. Feklisov testified that a proximity fuse "increases the possibility to shoot down enemy planes may be ten....twenty times and that it was used to shoot down the U-2
, which put the end to the 1960 summit conference between Eisenhower and Khrushchev."
Rosenberg, unless Feklisov is a convincing liar, definitely had his past to answer for.
EDIT USLESS ABORTION ARGUMENT BECAUSE THEIR IS NO CHANGING A PRO-LIFE/CHOICEer:
Abortion I feel it is fine, whilst you don't.
If you were aborted, I doubt you'd feel the same you do. The word "fine" probably is not the best choice of words either.
Often, people can save their own lives by having an abortion.
You better cite something because that statement I'm pretty sure is false.
"Often" does not mean 8.3 [maternal deaths] per 100,000 live births (Cited Piece
). The idea that many women are at risk of losing their lives during the process of childbirth is certainly a brash and unfounded assumption.
Our foster care system is far from perfect, would you rather have a child grow up in a terrible environment, with high chance for disease.
You're definitely going to have to back that up. I don't know how many foster care homes are ravaged with disease and sickness, but I doubt it's a fraction of a fraction of a percent. And you insue that the introduction of a child into any foster care program or adoption is automatically a sharp personal/social handicap by stating that because the system is not perfect, that they will grow up undoubtedly in a poor environment. This is untrue. I know many adopted individuals, female, male, both young and old, are they the exceptions that they contributed to society and my life in particular?
Most of the time the child doesn't even make it to foster care when it is needed.
I'd believe it if I read it.
I would probably not support abortion if we had a perfect foster care system and could eliminate disease and chance of birth deaths. However, that hasn't happened.
Dead babies as a result of an imperfect system? Sounds like a distorted look at life to me.
Edited by Evil, 10 June 2004 - 03:41 PM.