Should the family be abolished in a communist society?

  • News
  • Thread starter GENIERE
  • Start date
In summary, Hillary Clinton spoke at the 1995 UN World Conference on Women and emphasized the importance of respecting a woman's choices for herself and her family. However, in a 1979 piece, she also argued that decisions about motherhood and abortion should not be made solely by parents. This statement has been criticized by some for contradicting her pro-choice stance. The conversation then shifted to discussing scandals and wrongdoings by both Democrats and Republicans, with a focus on the Clinton administration and the UN. One participant brought up the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the controversy surrounding Hillary's handling of it. Another participant argued that the Libby/Rove situation, in which they knowingly endangered lives to protect themselves, is a larger problem than past scandals
  • #1
GENIERE
At the 1995 UN World Conference on Women, Hillary said, “We must respect the choices that each women makes for herself and her family”.
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/hillaryclintonbeijingspeech.htm

Apparently a woman’s rights re: her children are quite limited

In 1979, Hillary wrote, "… Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect the child's future should not be made unilaterally by parents." Who else should help make these decisions? A committee in the global village, of course.’
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=16362

In the Marxist/liberal/socialist scheme the family is not a social unit; it is an economic unit; a building block of a classless, raceless society made so by eliminating the offensive classes and races that cannot compete in the new social order.

Karl Marx in the New York Tribune 1853, "Forced Emigration":
"Society is undergoing a silent revolution, which must be submitted to, and which takes no more notice of the human existences it breaks down than an earthquake regards the houses it subverts. The classes and the races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way.

..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You're starting the campaign a little early, don't you think?
 
  • #3
Yah what is up with this barrage. Was there some sort of bickering war declared that i missed?
 
  • #4
Pengwuino said:
Yah what is up with this barrage. Was there some sort of bickering war declared that i missed?
No, it's called a diversion. Bush and company are not doing too well. Poll numbers slipping. Republicans and Dems castigating Bush and his ilk. Libby going to trial with Rove and Cheney still on the burner.

What's a republican to do?

Oh I know, attack Hil and Bill. We ALL know Hil is the Dem choice in 08 and Bill is obvously still in power. Don't focus attention on the real criminals and real crimes rather look at partial transcripts from right-wing publications for threads and attacks. Don't attack the crime or criminal---attack the someone else. Blame Canada!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
faust... even you can't be so naive to think there aren't just as many criminal acts centering on democrats and their leaders. Step outside your liberal blogs for a moment and look at what's going on in the real world.

I have a few stories, NY times and Guardian reports, about huge scandals and wrongdoings for democrats and the UN. I'm waiting to see if any liberals will step outside their blind biased ideological dogmatic attacks and present a fair view of the world. 2 weeks later, nothing.
 
  • #6
Pengwuino said:
faust... even you can't be so naive to think there aren't just as many criminal acts centering on democrats and their leaders. Step outside your liberal blogs for a moment and look at what's going on in the real world.

I have a few stories, NY times and Guardian reports, about huge scandals and wrongdoings for democrats and the UN. I'm waiting to see if any liberals will step outside their blind biased ideological dogmatic attacks and present a fair view of the world. 2 weeks later, nothing.

LIBBY(and Rove) ENDANGERED LIVES! They endangered lives to hush a critic. They endangered lives to keep support for a needless war. LIBBY(and Rove) ENDANGERED LIVES!Now, you go ahead and list ALL of the democratic and republican scandals you know of and we'll see how many pale in comparison to this one.

Did you watch 60 minutes tonight?
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Well here, I can start you off...

$1,800,000,000

Go look at how many lives get endangered there. Go take a look... it won't hurt... come on, it doesn't bite... google news is happy news...
 
  • #8
I wonder how many republicans and democrats(officials elected) were involved? Hmmmm. Nope, OUR government endangering its OWN agents is MUCH worse. We are sabotaging ourselves from the top down.
 
  • #9
The UN and the Clinton administration endangered 25 million Iraqies and countless other middle easterners and thousands of our military men and women.

Guess you have your priorities screwed up?

Oh yah, and they got $$$ to do it.
 
  • #10
Pengwuino said:
...I have a few stories, NY times and Guardian reports, about huge scandals and wrongdoings for democrats and the UN...

You too? I hope your collection is smaller than mine. Damn, I just flew back from LV and was distracted for a few days! Damn, I've only touched on about .5% of Clinton's cavernous clutch of crimes. So many scandals, so little time.
 
  • #11
Stick with new stuff, who cares if Burger committed treason 40,000 years ago... i don't think this sub-forum is meant for brining up the past.
 
  • #12
Pengwuino said:
The UN and the Clinton administration endangered 25 million Iraqies and countless other middle easterners and thousands of our military men and women.

Guess you have your priorities screwed up?

Oh yah, and they got $$$ to do it.


Wow, how quickly you changed your tune. You went from the food for oil scandle (businessmen) to directly charging Clinton and the UN for endangering lives.

Again, you dodged the real issue. Bush and his ilk are hurting this country's ability to gather intelligence while ENDANGERING American who are trying to get information to protect us. Hmmmm, you still have not put forth a scandle worse than what we are seeing right now. War based on lies---2000+ soldiers dead. Endanger CIA agensts. Why don't you gather some OFF literature and start posting it (read it as you go). You will see a huge divide between that and Libby/Rove. Libby/Rove knowling endangered lives.
 
  • #13
GENIERE said:
Apparently a woman’s rights re: her children are quite limited
In 1979, Hillary wrote, "… Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect the child's future should not be made unilaterally by parents."
..

So she is saying that abortion should not be left up to the woman herself! And I thought she was prochoice.

BTW, nice commie, what an oxymoron!
 
  • #14
Wow... US military aircraft attacked for years, $2billion to Saddam, UN kickbacks, 300,000 dead under Saddam is a smaller problem then a political witch hunt?

Wow, good luck winning the 08 election with such priorities.

Oh and thanks for telling me to stick to your story and then demanding i bring up a different story. Real constructive and intelligent.
 
  • #15
Pengwuino said:
Stick with new stuff, who cares if Burger committed treason 40,000 years ago... i don't think this sub-forum is meant for brining up the past.

Ahhh, now we make stuff up to support your position and then try to redirect the conversation to avoid addressing this lie. Burger did not commit treason. In fact, Rove/Libby did a worse thing by outing an agent---join the military and get a secret clearance(I've got mine still) and you'll learn about loss of control of classified information and the ramifications. Willfully endangering CIA agnts is far worse than taking some papers in your socks there killer. WILLFULLY I say.
 
  • #16
heh, "loss of control"... if that's what you want to call it. Oh the priorities...

Oh and i like the whole, guilty before trial thing
 
  • #17
faust9 said:
Oh I know, attack Hil and Bill. We ALL know Hil is the Dem choice in 08 and Bill is obvously still in power. Don't focus attention on the real criminals and real crimes rather look at partial transcripts from right-wing publications for threads and attacks. Don't attack the crime or criminal---attack the someone else. Blame Canada!
Why are you so disconcerted by the facts about Hillary which GENIERE has pointed out?
Why are you trying to deviate attention from the topic by randomly inserting Bush and Rove in this discussion and spouting meaningless phrases about blaming Canada which no one has done in this thread?
This is becoming quite a phenomena here. No matter what the topic, anything and everything is always Bush's and Rove's fault. To paraphrase the blog littlegreenfootballs, it looks like history began with President Bush. Madness!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
Canada smells bad

There, i gave him a reason so he doesn't sound that insane. I'm very willing to please everyone :)

Anyhow, back to work... this is yet another insane discussion brought to you by Politics and World Affairs.
 
  • #19
Okay folks, how about addressing the original question rather than bickering over something off-topic. If Geniere wants to discuss Hillary Clinton, and the rest of you don't, then nobody is compelling you to post in this thread.

Geniere, by your own definition of a Marxist/liberal/socialist scheme, aren't you contradicting your claims that Hillary is applying communist principles to her remarks? Where does she say anything about economics?

It does suggest she had a very different view about abortion and women's rights over 25 years ago than she expresses today, but have you never in your life changed your views on something as you learned more about it? I had quite different views on some things as little as 10 years ago, but as I experienced more of the world, and lived in different places, became exposed to more people of different classes and backgrounds and beliefs, my views have changed and taken shape more consistent with my observations of the needs of a broader cross-section of society than I had been exposed to even 10 years ago. Is there anything more current that would indicate this is an inconsistency between what she says and does vs something she has simply changed her views on over time? I mean, in the late 70s, there were still a lot of people advocating a "global village" and the hippie commune view; some still hang onto that, others have not.
 
  • #20
Pengwuino said:
Stick with new stuff, who cares if Burger committed treason 40,000 years ago... i don't think this sub-forum is meant for brining up the past.
:uhh: No reason to ignore the past. One would hope that modern-day politicians are well-versed in the past in order to build off the good ideas and to avoid the mistakes.
"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." ~ George Santayana
 

1. Should the family be abolished in a communist society?

No, the concept of family is not necessarily incompatible with communism. In fact, many communist societies recognize the importance of familial bonds and strive to create a sense of community within families.

2. How would abolishing the family affect children in a communist society?

It is unlikely that the family would be completely abolished in a communist society. However, if there were changes to the traditional family structure, children would likely be raised and supported by both their biological parents as well as the larger community.

3. Would abolishing the family lead to a breakdown of traditional values and morals?

There is no guarantee that abolishing the family would lead to a breakdown of traditional values and morals. In fact, a strong sense of community and shared responsibility could enhance these values in a communist society.

4. How would abolishing the family affect personal relationships and marriages?

Again, it is unlikely that the family would be completely abolished. However, if there were changes to the traditional family structure, personal relationships and marriages would likely be redefined and based on different principles such as equality and mutual support.

5. What would happen to the elderly and dependent individuals in a society without a traditional family structure?

In a communist society, the elderly and dependent individuals would still have a support system, whether it be through community care or government programs. There would also be a societal value placed on taking care of those who are unable to care for themselves.

Similar threads

News Should the US intervene in world problems?
    • General Discussion
Replies
29
Views
9K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top