🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <RLM.93Apr2050627@helen.surfcty.com>, rlm@helen.surfcty.com
(Robert L. McMillin) rants:
> The left likes to dodge the issues of morality and behavior, crying that
> anyone who raises them "blames the victim."  Nonetheless, as a recent
> editorial in the {Los Angeles Times} pointed out, the free love
> advocates of the 1960's have demolished the poor.  It's one thing to
> have children out of wedlock if you're, say, Murphy Brown (or someone
> like her), turning over a six figure salary -- and quite another if
> you're sixteen, have no skills, and no income.

And how did the "free love advocates of the 1960's" manage to perform
this demolition--forced breeding programs or something?

> By accepting and even celebrating single, out-of-wedlock parenthood, the
> 1960's radicals espousing free love set the stage for catastrophe among
> the poor. They must account for this...

Now let me get this straight.  After a nice, long rant about how
people need to take personal responsibility for their economic and
social lives, all of a sudden 1960's radicals (such as me, I guess)
are responsible for poor people's lifestyles?  Tell me how that
works--or do you think that poor people are just too dumb to think
for themselves?

There are many reasons for the disintegration of the family and
support systems in general among this nation's poor.  Somehow I
don't think Murphy Brown--or Janis Joplin--is at the top of any 
sane person's list.

You want to go after my generation's vaunted cultural revolution for
a lasting change for the worse, try so-called "relevant" or "values"
education.  Hey, it seemed like a good idea at the time.  How were
we to know you needed a real education first--I mean, we took that
for granted.

               *** ***
Ken Perlow   ***** *****
05 Apr 93   ****** ******   16 Germinal An CCI
            *****   *****   gadfly@ihspc.att.com
             ** ** ** **
...L'AUDACE!   *** ***   TOUJOURS DE L'AUDACE!  ENCORE DE L'AUDACE!