I am pro choice. However, I find it utterly offensive when anyone says it's the woman's choice and the woman's only. we BOTH got pregnant. yes, you carry the fetus, but if I was willing to allow you to sever all parental obligations after the birth, I think that would be something worth discussing. Of course, if it meant the woman going through something that would be ill advised health wise, I think the man has rights too.
not in the judicial system yet, as it's very tricky to "force" a woman to have a baby to term if she doesn't want to, but there's got to be some common ground.
I'd be incredibly upset if I found out someone I got pregnant aborted without even giving me the consideration of consultation first.
Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think it's very relevant that you're a man. I don't think men have any business whatsoever sticking their nose into the issue, honestly. They cannot EVER understand abortion or the many different levels of reasoning and emotions around the issue. They just can't. Because it's not their bodies that have ever or will ever be the bodies that carry a fetus. Sorry. I find it fairly offensive when men act like they think they really know what they're talking when it comes to abortion. I'm a woman who has had an abortion as well as a miscarriage ... I think I have a much clearer view of the issue that you ever could, no matter how much you want to wax-on about it, which is why I tend to kind of blow off men who have all this blah blah blahing to do on the matter of pro-life (men who just respect the woman's right to choose is what I can respect). It means nothing to me. You just don't know (not that you don't have a right to your opinion... I just can't muster any interest in what it is). Sorry. :?
then is a man's opinion on the matter irrelevant even if he's pro choice? because you can't have it both ways. if you don't want men sticking their collective nose into the issue, then abortions never become legal, and yours either never takes place or you're in a back alley with a coat hanger, metaphorically speaking.
telling any one group their opinion is moot because they belong to that group obliterates that person's credibility. I was with you up until that point.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.
but you were going much further in your stance than just "yeah, it sucks that it's not the man's choice". you were telling him that his opinion on abortion as a whole doesn't matter because he's a man. is that not what you said?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I think it's very relevant that you're a man. I don't think men have any business whatsoever sticking their nose into the issue, honestly. They cannot EVER understand abortion or the many different levels of reasoning and emotions around the issue. They just can't. Because it's not their bodies that have ever or will ever be the bodies that carry a fetus. Sorry. I find it fairly offensive when men act like they think they really know what they're talking when it comes to abortion. I'm a woman who has had an abortion as well as a miscarriage ... I think I have a much clearer view of the issue that you ever could, no matter how much you want to wax-on about it, which is why I tend to kind of blow off men who have all this blah blah blahing to do on the matter of pro-life (men who just respect the woman's right to choose is what I can respect). It means nothing to me. You just don't know (not that you don't have a right to your opinion... I just can't muster any interest in what it is). Sorry. :?
then is a man's opinion on the matter irrelevant even if he's pro choice? because you can't have it both ways. if you don't want men sticking their collective nose into the issue, then abortions never become legal, and yours either never takes place or you're in a back alley with a coat hanger, metaphorically speaking.
telling any one group their opinion is moot because they belong to that group obliterates that person's credibility. I was with you up until that point.
That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.
Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.
but you were going much further in your stance than just "yeah, it sucks that it's not the man's choice". you were telling him that his opinion on abortion as a whole doesn't matter because he's a man. is that not what you said?
Yes. That's what I said, and that's what I meant (of course, that stands for pro-life women as well, which I never mentioned... it's just more galling when it's a man, because a man isn't capable of understanding the issue the way a woman is). That doesn't mean that I don't personally think it's proper (in some circumstances at least) for a woman to discuss it with the father. That's respectful. The fact is, though, that in the end what he thinks about it is still moot. It still has to be her decision. And plus, since men are incapable of fully understanding the matter because they are incapable of knowing what it's like to be pregnant or even know what it's like to have the capacity to be pregnant, they opinion is doubly moot. Doesn't mean the father of a fetus shouldn't be included in the woman's decision-making process... I don't know about you, but for me, very few things are completely black and white; I consider that a given.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.
Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.
of course it makes sense! that's the basis of a democratic society! all we can hope for is that the "right" opinion is held by the majority!
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.
Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.
of course it makes sense! that's the basis of a democratic society! all we can hope for is that the "right" opinion is held by the majority!
You're right. That is all we can hope for... or, actually, not really. Even if 90% of the population believed in something that is still clearly against the constitution/Bill of Rights, it doesn't mean the law changes just to placate the 90% (at least, that's how it's supposed to work assuming the Supreme Court Justices are doing their jobs properly). Also, American isn't really a democracy, c'mon, you know that (but that's another thread! ). But I didn't even say that wasn't the case. I'm saying that a horrible opinion that is against basic human rights isn't equal to one that is for basic human rights. What didn't make sense is that you said "I can't have it both ways - if a male pro-lifer's opinion doesn't matter, then a male pro-choicer's opinion can't matter to me either." That doesn't make any sense.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I think it's very relevant that you're a man. I don't think men have any business whatsoever sticking their nose into the issue, honestly. They cannot EVER understand abortion or the many different levels of reasoning and emotions around the issue. They just can't. Because it's not their bodies that have ever or will ever be the bodies that carry a fetus. Sorry. I find it fairly offensive when men act like they think they really know what they're talking when it comes to abortion. I'm a woman who has had an abortion as well as a miscarriage ... I think I have a much clearer view of the issue that you ever could, no matter how much you want to wax-on about it, which is why I tend to kind of blow off men who have all this blah blah blahing to do on the matter of pro-life (men who just respect the woman's right to choose is what I can respect). It means nothing to me. You just don't know (not that you don't have a right to your opinion... I just can't muster any interest in what it is). Sorry. :?
then is a man's opinion on the matter irrelevant even if he's pro choice? because you can't have it both ways. if you don't want men sticking their collective nose into the issue, then abortions never become legal, and yours either never takes place or you're in a back alley with a coat hanger, metaphorically speaking.
telling any one group their opinion is moot because they belong to that group obliterates that person's credibility. I was with you up until that point.
That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.
Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.
I hope people get an opportunity to read your thoughts in this thread.
I am pro choice. However, I find it utterly offensive when anyone says it's the woman's choice and the woman's only. we BOTH got pregnant. yes, you carry the fetus, but if I was willing to allow you to sever all parental obligations after the birth, I think that would be something worth discussing. Of course, if it meant the woman going through something that would be ill advised health wise, I think the man has rights too.
not in the judicial system yet, as it's very tricky to "force" a woman to have a baby to term if she doesn't want to, but there's got to be some common ground.
I'd be incredibly upset if I found out someone I got pregnant aborted without even giving me the consideration of consultation first.
very tricky??... try impossible. not to mention a gross abuse of human rights.
im sure you would find it utterly offensive if a woman you got pregnant aborted without your consent let alone discussing the isssue with you, but when it comes down to it, you dont really have a say..sure you can voice your opinion but the ultimate decision lies with the womans. there can be no common ground if the woman decides to abort. be incredibly upset... thats fine but do it without piling guilt on the woman. you find a way to deal with her decision just the same as she finds a way to deal with her decision. hang on... theres some common ground for you right there.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...
All I know is, I wouldn't want to be an aborted fetus and I'm glad my Mom and wife didn't abort me or my kids. I'd simply advise women and men to think about what they're doing before they bang. Basically - if the contraception fails, then be prepared to have a kid. It's not rocket science and I don't feel bad about saying there are repercussions for human action, including sex. People hate taking responsibility for their actions these days. If you don't want a kid, and want to be positive you won't have one, don't have sex. If you want to have sex, go ahead, just use protection and know there's risk someone will end up pregnant. If that happens, you knew the consequences. So, you shouldn't just kill it. That could haunt someone for the rest of their life.
if you were an aborted foetus you wouldnt be cognisant of it so... .
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
...
I think it's very relevant that you're a man. I don't think men have any business whatsoever sticking their nose into the issue, honestly. They cannot EVER understand abortion or the many different levels of reasoning and emotions around the issue. They just can't. Because it's not their bodies that have ever or will ever be the bodies that carry a fetus. Sorry. I find it fairly offensive when men act like they think they really know what they're talking when it comes to abortion. I'm a woman who has had an abortion as well as a miscarriage ... I think I have a much clearer view of the issue that you ever could, no matter how much you want to wax-on about it, which is why I tend to kind of blow off men who have all this blah blah blahing to do on the matter of pro-life (men who just respect the woman's right to choose is what I can respect). It means nothing to me. You just don't know (not that you don't have a right to your opinion... I just can't muster any interest in what it is). Sorry. :?
i agree... men have a right to their opinion on abortion. by all means come back when you can get pregnant and then we can discuss the issue as informed equals. but until then know that you, and your opinion, just might be irrelevant when it comes down to it.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I might be out of the norm, go figure, but I am Pro choice and believe
life starts at conception, without question. I also do not sugar coat
and I believe abortion IS taking a life....
indeed premeditated murder.
Harsh but what women could consider before choosing abortion
to avoid regrets if at all possible. This regret is not one you want to take to the grave.
Being Pro Choice doesn't make me pro abortion as many have stated
in many threads.
Abortion in my mind is here to stay but laws based in good common sense
can be passed to help limit it as a choice. To give life a chance, to choose adoption.
To help both mother and child.
Also 14 weeks is not correct... many abortions are done after,
this varies by law and by state. At 24 weeks a child can live outside the womb and the law
states 2 or more doctors must be present to aid the child if indeed that is necessary.
there are some good facts here and a chart addressing when abortions take place as far as
weeks along
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
just because it is deemed legal practice, doesn't mean someone can't consider it murder.I consider the death penalty murder, even though it is legal in some states.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I might be out of the norm, go figure, but I am Pro choice and believe
life starts at conception, without question. I also do not sugar coat
and I believe abortion IS taking a life....
indeed premeditated murder.
Harsh but what women could consider before choosing abortion
to avoid regrets if at all possible. This regret is not one you want to take to the grave.
Being Pro Choice doesn't make me pro abortion as many have stated
in many threads.
Abortion in my mind is here to stay but laws based in good common sense
can be passed to help limit it as a choice. To give life a chance, to choose adoption.
To help both mother and child.
Also 14 weeks is not correct... many abortions are done after,
this varies by law and by state. At 24 weeks a child can live outside the womb and the law
states 2 or more doctors must be present to aid the child if indeed that is necessary.
there are some good facts here and a chart addressing when abortions take place as far as
weeks along
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
very true but the action and outcome is the same so I will continue to liken the two
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
just because it is deemed legal practice, doesn't mean someone can't consider it murder.I consider the death penalty murder, even though it is legal in some states.
true... i also consider the death penalty murder. when i addressed pandoras post i was thinking back to when it was killing became murder... and the different degrees involved.
i was wondering at what point intent would eneter the picture... would it be...if i become pregnant i am going to abort or upon finding one pregnant, i cant have this child(for whatever reason) abortion is the option im choosing. is there a difference? or would you(generally speaking) consider them the same?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
just because it is deemed legal practice, doesn't mean someone can't consider it murder.I consider the death penalty murder, even though it is legal in some states.
true... i also consider the death penalty murder. when i addressed pandoras post i was thinking back to when it was killing became murder... and the different degrees involved.
i was wondering at what point intent would eneter the picture... would it be...if i become pregnant i am going to abort or upon finding one pregnant, i cant have this child(for whatever reason) abortion is the option im choosing. is there a difference? or would you(generally speaking) consider them the same?
it's hard for me to say, since I don't know that I consider abortion murder. I find the person in your first example to be incredibly self centred and irresponsible.
I actually once had unprotected "relations" with a girl I later found out had 6 abortions, because her stance was your first example. She never used contraceptives, because she didn't care if she had to abort it if it happened. I always wondered if I was #7. God I hope not. Although I have heard that the more times you abort, the less likely it is you can even get pregnant later on. Six abortion is absolutely insane. And that was by the time we were 27 years old.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I actually once had unprotected "relations" with a girl I later found out had 6 abortions, because her stance was your first example. She never used contraceptives, because she didn't care if she had to abort it if it happened. I always wondered if I was #7. God I hope not. Although I have heard that the more times you abort, the less likely it is you can even get pregnant later on. Six abortion is absolutely insane. And that was by the time we were 27 years old.
Unless you got that information directly from the girl in question, I would take it with a grain of salt. (I'd probably take it with a grain of salt even if you did get it directly from her, depending on the context.) Also, FYI, that whole infertility line isn't really true.
I actually once had unprotected "relations" with a girl I later found out had 6 abortions, because her stance was your first example. She never used contraceptives, because she didn't care if she had to abort it if it happened. I always wondered if I was #7. God I hope not. Although I have heard that the more times you abort, the less likely it is you can even get pregnant later on. Six abortion is absolutely insane. And that was by the time we were 27 years old.
Unless you got that information directly from the girl in question, I would take it with a grain of salt. (I'd probably take it with a grain of salt even if you did get it directly from her, depending on the context.) Also, FYI, that whole infertility line isn't really true.
funny you should say that.. i was on the bus yesterday and this girl was having the loudest convo on her phone. and aside from the thought inside my head that was saying shut up please dont wanna hear your business (and it was personal business id be loathe to share with anyone over the phone, let alone a busful of strangers) i heard her say..oh yeah she had a miscarriage 2/3 weeks ago and shes already pregnant again. i thoguht wow reallY??? i dotn even think thats possible, let alone know it for sure.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I might be out of the norm, go figure, but I am Pro choice and believe
life starts at conception, without question. I also do not sugar coat
and I believe abortion IS taking a life....
indeed premeditated murder.
Harsh but what women could consider before choosing abortion
to avoid regrets if at all possible. This regret is not one you want to take to the grave.
Being Pro Choice doesn't make me pro abortion as many have stated
in many threads.
Abortion in my mind is here to stay but laws based in good common sense
can be passed to help limit it as a choice. To give life a chance, to choose adoption.
To help both mother and child.
Also 14 weeks is not correct... many abortions are done after,
this varies by law and by state. At 24 weeks a child can live outside the womb and the law
states 2 or more doctors must be present to aid the child if indeed that is necessary.
there are some good facts here and a chart addressing when abortions take place as far as
weeks along
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
very true but the action and outcome is the same so I will continue to liken the two
so does that mean in your quietest moments you think of yourself as a murderer??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Unless you got that information directly from the girl in question, I would take it with a grain of salt.
so you know her, and who told me, do you? :roll:
Nope. If you'll read more carefully, I specifically indicated that I don't know who told you. So I don't know what you're getting all pissy about. :roll:
I'm just saying that people make up and exaggerate that kind of shit about other people all the time, when most people don't really know jack shit about other people's reproductive health histories - even if they heard it from the person herself. I'd say 9 times out of 10, when someone tells you something like that - especially something that's so unlikely to be true in general - about someone else, it's wrong. I've just seen a LOT of people go through life with misinformation about other people's - and even their own - reproductive health histories because they just believed what they were told. But you can go ahead and take it as the gospel truth if you want to, and even perpetuate the story, and think she aborted your baby #7 - hell, maybe #7, #8, & #9. I couldn't care less.
A Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick (1729)
By Jonathan Swift
It is a melancholy object to those, who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads and cabbin-doors crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an alms. These mothers instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in stroling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants who, as they grow up, either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country, to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes.
I think it is agreed by all parties, that this prodigious number of children in the arms, or on the backs, or at the heels of their mothers, and frequently of their fathers, is in the present deplorable state of the kingdom, a very great additional grievance; and therefore whoever could find out a fair, cheap and easy method of making these children sound and useful members of the common-wealth, would deserve so well of the publick, as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the nation.
But my intention is very far from being confined to provide only for the children of professed beggars: it is of a much greater extent, and shall take in the whole number of infants at a certain age, who are born of parents in effect as little able to support them, as those who demand our charity in the streets.
As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many years, upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of our projectors, I have always found them grossly mistaken in their computation. It is true, a child just dropt from its dam, may be supported by her milk, for a solar year, with little other nourishment: at most not above the value of two shillings, which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging; and it is exactly at one year old that I propose to provide for them in such a manner, as, instead of being a charge upon their parents, or the parish, or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall, on the contrary, contribute to the feeding, and partly to the cloathing of many thousands.
There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us, sacrificing the poor innocent babes, I doubt, more to avoid the expence than the shame, which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast.
The number of souls in this kingdom being usually reckoned one million and a half, of these I calculate there may be about two hundred thousand couple whose wives are breeders; from which number I subtract thirty thousand couple, who are able to maintain their own children, (although I apprehend there cannot be so many, under the present distresses of the kingdom) but this being granted, there will remain an hundred and seventy thousand breeders. I again subtract fifty thousand, for those women who miscarry, or whose children die by accident or disease within the year. There only remain an hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born. The question therefore is, How this number shall be reared, and provided for? which, as I have already said, under the present situation of affairs, is utterly impossible by all the methods hitherto proposed. For we can neither employ them in handicraft or agriculture; we neither build houses, (I mean in the country) nor cultivate land: they can very seldom pick up a livelihood by stealing till they arrive at six years old; except where they are of towardly parts, although I confess they learn the rudiments much earlier; during which time they can however be properly looked upon only as probationers: As I have been informed by a principal gentleman in the county of Cavan, who protested to me, that he never knew above one or two instances under the age of six, even in a part of the kingdom so renowned for the quickest proficiency in that art.
I am assured by our merchants, that a boy or a girl before twelve years old, is no saleable commodity, and even when they come to this age, they will not yield above three pounds, or three pounds and half a crown at most, on the exchange; which cannot turn to account either to the parents or kingdom, the charge of nutriments and rags having been at least four times that value.
I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection.
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust.
I do therefore humbly offer it to publick consideration, that of the hundred and twenty thousand children, already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle, or swine, and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore, one male will be sufficient to serve four females. That the remaining hundred thousand may, at a year old, be offered in sale to the persons of quality and fortune, through the kingdom, always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump, and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends, and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt, will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.
I have reckoned upon a medium, that a child just born will weigh 12 pounds, and in a solar year, if tolerably nursed, encreaseth to 28 pounds.
I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.
Infant's flesh will be in season throughout the year, but more plentiful in March, and a little before and after; for we are told by a grave author, an eminent French physician, that fish being a prolifick dyet, there are more children born in Roman Catholick countries about nine months after Lent, the markets will be more glutted than usual, because the number of Popish infants, is at least three to one in this kingdom, and therefore it will have one other collateral advantage, by lessening the number of Papists among us.
I have already computed the charge of nursing a beggar's child (in which list I reckon all cottagers, labourers, and four-fifths of the farmers) to be about two shillings per annum, rags included; and I believe no gentleman would repine to give ten shillings for the carcass of a good fat child, which, as I have said, will make four dishes of excellent nutritive meat, when he hath only some particular friend, or his own family to dine with him. Thus the squire will learn to be a good landlord, and grow popular among his tenants, the mother will have eight shillings neat profit, and be fit for work till she produces another child.
Those who are more thrifty (as I must confess the times require) may flea the carcass; the skin of which, artificially dressed, will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine gentlemen.
As to our City of Dublin, shambles may be appointed for this purpose, in the most convenient parts of it, and butchers we may be assured will not be wanting; although I rather recommend buying the children alive, and dressing them hot from the knife, as we do roasting pigs.
A very worthy person, a true lover of his country, and whose virtues I highly esteem, was lately pleased, in discoursing on this matter, to offer a refinement upon my scheme. He said, that many gentlemen of this kingdom, having of late destroyed their deer, he conceived that the want of venison might be well supply'd by the bodies of young lads and maidens, not exceeding fourteen years of age, nor under twelve; so great a number of both sexes in every country being now ready to starve for want of work and service: And these to be disposed of by their parents if alive, or otherwise by their nearest relations. But with due deference to so excellent a friend, and so deserving a patriot, I cannot be altogether in his sentiments; for as to the males, my American acquaintance assured me from frequent experience, that their flesh was generally tough and lean, like that of our school-boys, by continual exercise, and their taste disagreeable, and to fatten them would not answer the charge. Then as to the females, it would, I think, with humble submission, be a loss to the publick, because they soon would become breeders themselves: And besides, it is not improbable that some scrupulous people might be apt to censure such a practice, (although indeed very unjustly) as a little bordering upon cruelty, which, I confess, hath always been with me the strongest objection against any project, how well soever intended.
But in order to justify my friend, he confessed, that this expedient was put into his head by the famous Salmanaazor, a native of the island Formosa, who came from thence to London, above twenty years ago, and in conversation told my friend, that in his country, when any young person happened to be put to death, the executioner sold the carcass to persons of quality, as a prime dainty; and that, in his time, the body of a plump girl of fifteen, who was crucified for an attempt to poison the Emperor, was sold to his imperial majesty's prime minister of state, and other great mandarins of the court in joints from the gibbet, at four hundred crowns. Neither indeed can I deny, that if the same use were made of several plump young girls in this town, who without one single groat to their fortunes, cannot stir abroad without a chair, and appear at a play-house and assemblies in foreign fineries which they never will pay for; the kingdom would not be the worse.
Some persons of a desponding spirit are in great concern about that vast number of poor people, who are aged, diseased, or maimed; and I have been desired to employ my thoughts what course may be taken, to ease the nation of so grievous an incumbrance. But I am not in the least pain upon that matter, because it is very well known, that they are every day dying, and rotting, by cold and famine, and filth, and vermin, as fast as can be reasonably expected. And as to the young labourers, they are now in almost as hopeful a condition. They cannot get work, and consequently pine away from want of nourishment, to a degree, that if at any time they are accidentally hired to common labour, they have not strength to perform it, and thus the country and themselves are happily delivered from the evils to come.
I have too long digressed, and therefore shall return to my subject. I think the advantages by the proposal which I have made are obvious and many, as well as of the highest importance.
For first, as I have already observed, it would greatly lessen the number of Papists, with whom we are yearly over-run, being the principal breeders of the nation, as well as our most dangerous enemies, and who stay at home on purpose with a design to deliver the kingdom to the Pretender, hoping to take their advantage by the absence of so many good Protestants, who have chosen rather to leave their country, than stay at home and pay tithes against their conscience to an episcopal curate.
Secondly, The poorer tenants will have something valuable of their own, which by law may be made liable to a distress, and help to pay their landlord's rent, their corn and cattle being already seized, and money a thing unknown.
Thirdly, Whereas the maintainance of an hundred thousand children, from two years old, and upwards, cannot be computed at less than ten shillings a piece per annum, the nation's stock will be thereby encreased fifty thousand pounds per annum, besides the profit of a new dish, introduced to the tables of all gentlemen of fortune in the kingdom, who have any refinement in taste. And the money will circulate among our selves, the goods being entirely of our own growth and manufacture.
Fourthly, The constant breeders, besides the gain of eight shillings sterling per annum by the sale of their children, will be rid of the charge of maintaining them after the first year.
Fifthly, This food would likewise bring great custom to taverns, where the vintners will certainly be so prudent as to procure the best receipts for dressing it to perfection; and consequently have their houses frequented by all the fine gentlemen, who justly value themselves upon their knowledge in good eating; and a skilful cook, who understands how to oblige his guests, will contrive to make it as expensive as they please.
Sixthly, This would be a great inducement to marriage, which all wise nations have either encouraged by rewards, or enforced by laws and penalties. It would encrease the care and tenderness of mothers towards their children, when they were sure of a settlement for life to the poor babes, provided in some sort by the publick, to their annual profit instead of expence. We should soon see an honest emulation among the married women, which of them could bring the fattest child to the market. Men would become as fond of their wives, during the time of their pregnancy, as they are now of their mares in foal, their cows in calf, or sow when they are ready to farrow; nor offer to beat or kick them (as is too frequent a practice) for fear of a miscarriage.
Many other advantages might be enumerated. For instance, the addition of some thousand carcasses in our exportation of barrel'd beef: the propagation of swine's flesh, and improvement in the art of making good bacon, so much wanted among us by the great destruction of pigs, too frequent at our tables; which are no way comparable in taste or magnificence to a well grown, fat yearly child, which roasted whole will make a considerable figure at a Lord Mayor's feast, or any other publick entertainment. But this, and many others, I omit, being studious of brevity.
Supposing that one thousand families in this city, would be constant customers for infants flesh, besides others who might have it at merry meetings, particularly at weddings and christenings, I compute that Dublin would take off annually about twenty thousand carcasses; and the rest of the kingdom (where probably they will be sold somewhat cheaper) the remaining eighty thousand.
I can think of no one objection, that will possibly be raised against this proposal, unless it should be urged, that the number of people will be thereby much lessened in the kingdom. This I freely own, and 'twas indeed one principal design in offering it to the world. I desire the reader will observe, that I calculate my remedy for this one individual Kingdom of Ireland, and for no other that ever was, is, or, I think, ever can be upon Earth. Therefore let no man talk to me of other expedients: Of taxing our absentees at five shillings a pound: Of using neither cloaths, nor houshold furniture, except what is of our own growth and manufacture: Of utterly rejecting the materials and instruments that promote foreign luxury: Of curing the expensiveness of pride, vanity, idleness, and gaming in our women: Of introducing a vein of parsimony, prudence and temperance: Of learning to love our country, wherein we differ even from Laplanders, and the inhabitants of Topinamboo: Of quitting our animosities and factions, nor acting any longer like the Jews, who were murdering one another at the very moment their city was taken: Of being a little cautious not to sell our country and consciences for nothing: Of teaching landlords to have at least one degree of mercy towards their tenants. Lastly, of putting a spirit of honesty, industry, and skill into our shop-keepers, who, if a resolution could now be taken to buy only our native goods, would immediately unite to cheat and exact upon us in the price, the measure, and the goodness, nor could ever yet be brought to make one fair proposal of just dealing, though often and earnestly invited to it.
Therefore I repeat, let no man talk to me of these and the like expedients, 'till he hath at least some glympse of hope, that there will ever be some hearty and sincere attempt to put them into practice.
But, as to my self, having been wearied out for many years with offering vain, idle, visionary thoughts, and at length utterly despairing of success, I fortunately fell upon this proposal, which, as it is wholly new, so it hath something solid and real, of no expence and little trouble, full in our own power, and whereby we can incur no danger in disobliging England. For this kind of commodity will not bear exportation, and flesh being of too tender a consistence, to admit a long continuance in salt, although perhaps I could name a country, which would be glad to eat up our whole nation without it.
After all, I am not so violently bent upon my own opinion, as to reject any offer, proposed by wise men, which shall be found equally innocent, cheap, easy, and effectual. But before something of that kind shall be advanced in contradiction to my scheme, and offering a better, I desire the author or authors will be pleased maturely to consider two points. First, As things now stand, how they will be able to find food and raiment for a hundred thousand useless mouths and backs. And secondly, There being a round million of creatures in humane figure throughout this kingdom, whose whole subsistence put into a common stock, would leave them in debt two million of pounds sterling, adding those who are beggars by profession, to the bulk of farmers, cottagers and labourers, with their wives and children, who are beggars in effect; I desire those politicians who dislike my overture, and may perhaps be so bold to attempt an answer, that they will first ask the parents of these mortals, whether they would not at this day think it a great happiness to have been sold for food at a year old, in the manner I prescribe, and thereby have avoided such a perpetual scene of misfortunes, as they have since gone through, by the oppression of landlords, the impossibility of paying rent without money or trade, the want of common sustenance, with neither house nor cloaths to cover them from the inclemencies of the weather, and the most inevitable prospect of intailing the like, or greater miseries, upon their breed for ever.
I profess, in the sincerity of my heart, that I have not the least personal interest in endeavouring to promote this necessary work, having no other motive than the publick good of my country, by advancing our trade, providing for infants, relieving the poor, and giving some pleasure to the rich. I have no children, by which I can propose to get a single penny; the youngest being nine years old, and my wife past child-bearing.
Unless you got that information directly from the girl in question, I would take it with a grain of salt.
so you know her, and who told me, do you? :roll:
Nope. If you'll read more carefully, I specifically indicated that I don't know who told you. So I don't know what you're getting all pissy about. :roll:
I'm just saying that people make up and exaggerate that kind of shit about other people all the time, when most people don't really know jack shit about other people's reproductive health histories - even if they heard it from the person herself. I'd say 9 times out of 10, when someone tells you something like that - especially something that's so unlikely to be true in general - about someone else, it's wrong. I've just seen a LOT of people go through life with misinformation about other people's - and even their own - reproductive health histories because they just believed what they were told. But you can go ahead and take it as the gospel truth if you want to, and even perpetuate the story, and think she aborted your baby #7 - hell, maybe #7, #8, & #9. I couldn't care less.
what a strange conversation to have with someone you don't know.
1)I'm not perpetuating anything. I haven't told anyone except in this thread. and since you don't know me or her, I'd say that's ok.
2) I'm taking nothing as gospel. it really doesn't matter to me. it was eons ago.
3) I used it as an example only for the purposes of this thread. I wasn't trying to get into a big thing here.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Comments
Yeah, I get that you would find it offensive that it's the woman's choice and the woman's choice only. By saying that, I didn't mean that women shouldn't consider the father's opinion. On the contrary, if he has one, I think that women should consider that opinion very carefully... if his opinion is worth listening to (consider all the variants involved connected to who the father is). In the end, however, no matter what the father wants, it IS still the woman's choice and hers alone, because it IS her body. I never said it didn't suck if the father doesn't agree. But I definitely don't believe that the law should dictate that the father has to agree with her choice for her to be able to have an abortion (especially when it may make sense for a woman to consult the father, but certainly would not in other cases... that all would depend very much on the situation, who the father is, etc). So I get why it might be frustrating for some men... but that doesn't change the fact that it must still be the woman's choice and hers alone that needs to be the bottom line. Of not, the consequences of that would be potentially disastrous.
then is a man's opinion on the matter irrelevant even if he's pro choice? because you can't have it both ways. if you don't want men sticking their collective nose into the issue, then abortions never become legal, and yours either never takes place or you're in a back alley with a coat hanger, metaphorically speaking.
telling any one group their opinion is moot because they belong to that group obliterates that person's credibility. I was with you up until that point.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
but you were going much further in your stance than just "yeah, it sucks that it's not the man's choice". you were telling him that his opinion on abortion as a whole doesn't matter because he's a man. is that not what you said?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
That doesn't really make any sense. Do you think the opinion of someone who supports legal slavery in America is equal to the opinion of someone who is against it?? I don't. It doesn't work that way. Guess what, all things are not equal in this world. A woman's right to choose is not equal to the lack of that right. A person's opinion that is against a human right is not equal to one that is for it. Thank God. Can you imagine if that were how it worked?? I would probably kill myself, much less bring a baby into that world.
Of course, it's not actually opinion I'm against. It's laws that prevent the right to choose. A person can have any old opinion they want... until it actually impinges on the right of a woman to choose.
Yes. That's what I said, and that's what I meant (of course, that stands for pro-life women as well, which I never mentioned... it's just more galling when it's a man, because a man isn't capable of understanding the issue the way a woman is). That doesn't mean that I don't personally think it's proper (in some circumstances at least) for a woman to discuss it with the father. That's respectful. The fact is, though, that in the end what he thinks about it is still moot. It still has to be her decision. And plus, since men are incapable of fully understanding the matter because they are incapable of knowing what it's like to be pregnant or even know what it's like to have the capacity to be pregnant, they opinion is doubly moot. Doesn't mean the father of a fetus shouldn't be included in the woman's decision-making process... I don't know about you, but for me, very few things are completely black and white; I consider that a given.
of course it makes sense! that's the basis of a democratic society! all we can hope for is that the "right" opinion is held by the majority!
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
You're right. That is all we can hope for... or, actually, not really. Even if 90% of the population believed in something that is still clearly against the constitution/Bill of Rights, it doesn't mean the law changes just to placate the 90% (at least, that's how it's supposed to work assuming the Supreme Court Justices are doing their jobs properly). Also, American isn't really a democracy, c'mon, you know that (but that's another thread!
I hope people get an opportunity to read your thoughts in this thread.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
very tricky??... try impossible. not to mention a gross abuse of human rights.
im sure you would find it utterly offensive if a woman you got pregnant aborted without your consent let alone discussing the isssue with you, but when it comes down to it, you dont really have a say..sure you can voice your opinion but the ultimate decision lies with the womans. there can be no common ground if the woman decides to abort. be incredibly upset... thats fine but do it without piling guilt on the woman. you find a way to deal with her decision just the same as she finds a way to deal with her decision. hang on... theres some common ground for you right there.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
if you were an aborted foetus you wouldnt be cognisant of it so... .
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I may not agree with every viewpoint, but to me they seem like decent guys who've given this much thought.
i agree... men have a right to their opinion on abortion. by all means come back when you can get pregnant and then we can discuss the issue as informed equals. but until then know that you, and your opinion, just might be irrelevant when it comes down to it.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
murder is a legal term. and as abhorrent as one may find abortion to be, it can not be considered murder under current common law where it is deemed a legal practice.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
just because it is deemed legal practice, doesn't mean someone can't consider it murder.I consider the death penalty murder, even though it is legal in some states.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
true... i also consider the death penalty murder. when i addressed pandoras post i was thinking back to when it was killing became murder... and the different degrees involved.
i was wondering at what point intent would eneter the picture... would it be...if i become pregnant i am going to abort or upon finding one pregnant, i cant have this child(for whatever reason) abortion is the option im choosing. is there a difference? or would you(generally speaking) consider them the same?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
it's hard for me to say, since I don't know that I consider abortion murder. I find the person in your first example to be incredibly self centred and irresponsible.
I actually once had unprotected "relations" with a girl I later found out had 6 abortions, because her stance was your first example. She never used contraceptives, because she didn't care if she had to abort it if it happened. I always wondered if I was #7. God I hope not. Although I have heard that the more times you abort, the less likely it is you can even get pregnant later on. Six abortion is absolutely insane. And that was by the time we were 27 years old.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Unless you got that information directly from the girl in question, I would take it with a grain of salt. (I'd probably take it with a grain of salt even if you did get it directly from her, depending on the context.) Also, FYI, that whole infertility line isn't really true.
funny you should say that.. i was on the bus yesterday and this girl was having the loudest convo on her phone. and aside from the thought inside my head that was saying shut up please dont wanna hear your business (and it was personal business id be loathe to share with anyone over the phone, let alone a busful of strangers) i heard her say..oh yeah she had a miscarriage 2/3 weeks ago and shes already pregnant again. i thoguht wow reallY??? i dotn even think thats possible, let alone know it for sure.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
so does that mean in your quietest moments you think of yourself as a murderer??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
so you know her, and who told me, do you? :roll:
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Nope. If you'll read more carefully, I specifically indicated that I don't know who told you. So I don't know what you're getting all pissy about. :roll:
I'm just saying that people make up and exaggerate that kind of shit about other people all the time, when most people don't really know jack shit about other people's reproductive health histories - even if they heard it from the person herself. I'd say 9 times out of 10, when someone tells you something like that - especially something that's so unlikely to be true in general - about someone else, it's wrong. I've just seen a LOT of people go through life with misinformation about other people's - and even their own - reproductive health histories because they just believed what they were told. But you can go ahead and take it as the gospel truth if you want to, and even perpetuate the story, and think she aborted your baby #7 - hell, maybe #7, #8, & #9. I couldn't care less.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
By Jonathan Swift
It is a melancholy object to those, who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads and cabbin-doors crowded with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an alms. These mothers instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in stroling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants who, as they grow up, either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country, to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes.
I think it is agreed by all parties, that this prodigious number of children in the arms, or on the backs, or at the heels of their mothers, and frequently of their fathers, is in the present deplorable state of the kingdom, a very great additional grievance; and therefore whoever could find out a fair, cheap and easy method of making these children sound and useful members of the common-wealth, would deserve so well of the publick, as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the nation.
But my intention is very far from being confined to provide only for the children of professed beggars: it is of a much greater extent, and shall take in the whole number of infants at a certain age, who are born of parents in effect as little able to support them, as those who demand our charity in the streets.
As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many years, upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of our projectors, I have always found them grossly mistaken in their computation. It is true, a child just dropt from its dam, may be supported by her milk, for a solar year, with little other nourishment: at most not above the value of two shillings, which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging; and it is exactly at one year old that I propose to provide for them in such a manner, as, instead of being a charge upon their parents, or the parish, or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall, on the contrary, contribute to the feeding, and partly to the cloathing of many thousands.
There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us, sacrificing the poor innocent babes, I doubt, more to avoid the expence than the shame, which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast.
The number of souls in this kingdom being usually reckoned one million and a half, of these I calculate there may be about two hundred thousand couple whose wives are breeders; from which number I subtract thirty thousand couple, who are able to maintain their own children, (although I apprehend there cannot be so many, under the present distresses of the kingdom) but this being granted, there will remain an hundred and seventy thousand breeders. I again subtract fifty thousand, for those women who miscarry, or whose children die by accident or disease within the year. There only remain an hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born. The question therefore is, How this number shall be reared, and provided for? which, as I have already said, under the present situation of affairs, is utterly impossible by all the methods hitherto proposed. For we can neither employ them in handicraft or agriculture; we neither build houses, (I mean in the country) nor cultivate land: they can very seldom pick up a livelihood by stealing till they arrive at six years old; except where they are of towardly parts, although I confess they learn the rudiments much earlier; during which time they can however be properly looked upon only as probationers: As I have been informed by a principal gentleman in the county of Cavan, who protested to me, that he never knew above one or two instances under the age of six, even in a part of the kingdom so renowned for the quickest proficiency in that art.
I am assured by our merchants, that a boy or a girl before twelve years old, is no saleable commodity, and even when they come to this age, they will not yield above three pounds, or three pounds and half a crown at most, on the exchange; which cannot turn to account either to the parents or kingdom, the charge of nutriments and rags having been at least four times that value.
I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection.
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust.
I do therefore humbly offer it to publick consideration, that of the hundred and twenty thousand children, already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle, or swine, and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore, one male will be sufficient to serve four females. That the remaining hundred thousand may, at a year old, be offered in sale to the persons of quality and fortune, through the kingdom, always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump, and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends, and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt, will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.
I have reckoned upon a medium, that a child just born will weigh 12 pounds, and in a solar year, if tolerably nursed, encreaseth to 28 pounds.
I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.
Infant's flesh will be in season throughout the year, but more plentiful in March, and a little before and after; for we are told by a grave author, an eminent French physician, that fish being a prolifick dyet, there are more children born in Roman Catholick countries about nine months after Lent, the markets will be more glutted than usual, because the number of Popish infants, is at least three to one in this kingdom, and therefore it will have one other collateral advantage, by lessening the number of Papists among us.
I have already computed the charge of nursing a beggar's child (in which list I reckon all cottagers, labourers, and four-fifths of the farmers) to be about two shillings per annum, rags included; and I believe no gentleman would repine to give ten shillings for the carcass of a good fat child, which, as I have said, will make four dishes of excellent nutritive meat, when he hath only some particular friend, or his own family to dine with him. Thus the squire will learn to be a good landlord, and grow popular among his tenants, the mother will have eight shillings neat profit, and be fit for work till she produces another child.
Those who are more thrifty (as I must confess the times require) may flea the carcass; the skin of which, artificially dressed, will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine gentlemen.
As to our City of Dublin, shambles may be appointed for this purpose, in the most convenient parts of it, and butchers we may be assured will not be wanting; although I rather recommend buying the children alive, and dressing them hot from the knife, as we do roasting pigs.
A very worthy person, a true lover of his country, and whose virtues I highly esteem, was lately pleased, in discoursing on this matter, to offer a refinement upon my scheme. He said, that many gentlemen of this kingdom, having of late destroyed their deer, he conceived that the want of venison might be well supply'd by the bodies of young lads and maidens, not exceeding fourteen years of age, nor under twelve; so great a number of both sexes in every country being now ready to starve for want of work and service: And these to be disposed of by their parents if alive, or otherwise by their nearest relations. But with due deference to so excellent a friend, and so deserving a patriot, I cannot be altogether in his sentiments; for as to the males, my American acquaintance assured me from frequent experience, that their flesh was generally tough and lean, like that of our school-boys, by continual exercise, and their taste disagreeable, and to fatten them would not answer the charge. Then as to the females, it would, I think, with humble submission, be a loss to the publick, because they soon would become breeders themselves: And besides, it is not improbable that some scrupulous people might be apt to censure such a practice, (although indeed very unjustly) as a little bordering upon cruelty, which, I confess, hath always been with me the strongest objection against any project, how well soever intended.
But in order to justify my friend, he confessed, that this expedient was put into his head by the famous Salmanaazor, a native of the island Formosa, who came from thence to London, above twenty years ago, and in conversation told my friend, that in his country, when any young person happened to be put to death, the executioner sold the carcass to persons of quality, as a prime dainty; and that, in his time, the body of a plump girl of fifteen, who was crucified for an attempt to poison the Emperor, was sold to his imperial majesty's prime minister of state, and other great mandarins of the court in joints from the gibbet, at four hundred crowns. Neither indeed can I deny, that if the same use were made of several plump young girls in this town, who without one single groat to their fortunes, cannot stir abroad without a chair, and appear at a play-house and assemblies in foreign fineries which they never will pay for; the kingdom would not be the worse.
Some persons of a desponding spirit are in great concern about that vast number of poor people, who are aged, diseased, or maimed; and I have been desired to employ my thoughts what course may be taken, to ease the nation of so grievous an incumbrance. But I am not in the least pain upon that matter, because it is very well known, that they are every day dying, and rotting, by cold and famine, and filth, and vermin, as fast as can be reasonably expected. And as to the young labourers, they are now in almost as hopeful a condition. They cannot get work, and consequently pine away from want of nourishment, to a degree, that if at any time they are accidentally hired to common labour, they have not strength to perform it, and thus the country and themselves are happily delivered from the evils to come.
I have too long digressed, and therefore shall return to my subject. I think the advantages by the proposal which I have made are obvious and many, as well as of the highest importance.
For first, as I have already observed, it would greatly lessen the number of Papists, with whom we are yearly over-run, being the principal breeders of the nation, as well as our most dangerous enemies, and who stay at home on purpose with a design to deliver the kingdom to the Pretender, hoping to take their advantage by the absence of so many good Protestants, who have chosen rather to leave their country, than stay at home and pay tithes against their conscience to an episcopal curate.
Secondly, The poorer tenants will have something valuable of their own, which by law may be made liable to a distress, and help to pay their landlord's rent, their corn and cattle being already seized, and money a thing unknown.
Thirdly, Whereas the maintainance of an hundred thousand children, from two years old, and upwards, cannot be computed at less than ten shillings a piece per annum, the nation's stock will be thereby encreased fifty thousand pounds per annum, besides the profit of a new dish, introduced to the tables of all gentlemen of fortune in the kingdom, who have any refinement in taste. And the money will circulate among our selves, the goods being entirely of our own growth and manufacture.
Fourthly, The constant breeders, besides the gain of eight shillings sterling per annum by the sale of their children, will be rid of the charge of maintaining them after the first year.
Fifthly, This food would likewise bring great custom to taverns, where the vintners will certainly be so prudent as to procure the best receipts for dressing it to perfection; and consequently have their houses frequented by all the fine gentlemen, who justly value themselves upon their knowledge in good eating; and a skilful cook, who understands how to oblige his guests, will contrive to make it as expensive as they please.
Sixthly, This would be a great inducement to marriage, which all wise nations have either encouraged by rewards, or enforced by laws and penalties. It would encrease the care and tenderness of mothers towards their children, when they were sure of a settlement for life to the poor babes, provided in some sort by the publick, to their annual profit instead of expence. We should soon see an honest emulation among the married women, which of them could bring the fattest child to the market. Men would become as fond of their wives, during the time of their pregnancy, as they are now of their mares in foal, their cows in calf, or sow when they are ready to farrow; nor offer to beat or kick them (as is too frequent a practice) for fear of a miscarriage.
Many other advantages might be enumerated. For instance, the addition of some thousand carcasses in our exportation of barrel'd beef: the propagation of swine's flesh, and improvement in the art of making good bacon, so much wanted among us by the great destruction of pigs, too frequent at our tables; which are no way comparable in taste or magnificence to a well grown, fat yearly child, which roasted whole will make a considerable figure at a Lord Mayor's feast, or any other publick entertainment. But this, and many others, I omit, being studious of brevity.
Supposing that one thousand families in this city, would be constant customers for infants flesh, besides others who might have it at merry meetings, particularly at weddings and christenings, I compute that Dublin would take off annually about twenty thousand carcasses; and the rest of the kingdom (where probably they will be sold somewhat cheaper) the remaining eighty thousand.
I can think of no one objection, that will possibly be raised against this proposal, unless it should be urged, that the number of people will be thereby much lessened in the kingdom. This I freely own, and 'twas indeed one principal design in offering it to the world. I desire the reader will observe, that I calculate my remedy for this one individual Kingdom of Ireland, and for no other that ever was, is, or, I think, ever can be upon Earth. Therefore let no man talk to me of other expedients: Of taxing our absentees at five shillings a pound: Of using neither cloaths, nor houshold furniture, except what is of our own growth and manufacture: Of utterly rejecting the materials and instruments that promote foreign luxury: Of curing the expensiveness of pride, vanity, idleness, and gaming in our women: Of introducing a vein of parsimony, prudence and temperance: Of learning to love our country, wherein we differ even from Laplanders, and the inhabitants of Topinamboo: Of quitting our animosities and factions, nor acting any longer like the Jews, who were murdering one another at the very moment their city was taken: Of being a little cautious not to sell our country and consciences for nothing: Of teaching landlords to have at least one degree of mercy towards their tenants. Lastly, of putting a spirit of honesty, industry, and skill into our shop-keepers, who, if a resolution could now be taken to buy only our native goods, would immediately unite to cheat and exact upon us in the price, the measure, and the goodness, nor could ever yet be brought to make one fair proposal of just dealing, though often and earnestly invited to it.
Therefore I repeat, let no man talk to me of these and the like expedients, 'till he hath at least some glympse of hope, that there will ever be some hearty and sincere attempt to put them into practice.
But, as to my self, having been wearied out for many years with offering vain, idle, visionary thoughts, and at length utterly despairing of success, I fortunately fell upon this proposal, which, as it is wholly new, so it hath something solid and real, of no expence and little trouble, full in our own power, and whereby we can incur no danger in disobliging England. For this kind of commodity will not bear exportation, and flesh being of too tender a consistence, to admit a long continuance in salt, although perhaps I could name a country, which would be glad to eat up our whole nation without it.
After all, I am not so violently bent upon my own opinion, as to reject any offer, proposed by wise men, which shall be found equally innocent, cheap, easy, and effectual. But before something of that kind shall be advanced in contradiction to my scheme, and offering a better, I desire the author or authors will be pleased maturely to consider two points. First, As things now stand, how they will be able to find food and raiment for a hundred thousand useless mouths and backs. And secondly, There being a round million of creatures in humane figure throughout this kingdom, whose whole subsistence put into a common stock, would leave them in debt two million of pounds sterling, adding those who are beggars by profession, to the bulk of farmers, cottagers and labourers, with their wives and children, who are beggars in effect; I desire those politicians who dislike my overture, and may perhaps be so bold to attempt an answer, that they will first ask the parents of these mortals, whether they would not at this day think it a great happiness to have been sold for food at a year old, in the manner I prescribe, and thereby have avoided such a perpetual scene of misfortunes, as they have since gone through, by the oppression of landlords, the impossibility of paying rent without money or trade, the want of common sustenance, with neither house nor cloaths to cover them from the inclemencies of the weather, and the most inevitable prospect of intailing the like, or greater miseries, upon their breed for ever.
I profess, in the sincerity of my heart, that I have not the least personal interest in endeavouring to promote this necessary work, having no other motive than the publick good of my country, by advancing our trade, providing for infants, relieving the poor, and giving some pleasure to the rich. I have no children, by which I can propose to get a single penny; the youngest being nine years old, and my wife past child-bearing.
what a strange conversation to have with someone you don't know.
1)I'm not perpetuating anything. I haven't told anyone except in this thread. and since you don't know me or her, I'd say that's ok.
2) I'm taking nothing as gospel. it really doesn't matter to me. it was eons ago.
3) I used it as an example only for the purposes of this thread. I wasn't trying to get into a big thing here.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014