I confess I have no patience for pro-choice senior citizens.
There they are whining about President Bush’s proposal to allow young workers to privately invest a percentage of their own Social Security payments, and I think: What nerve.
Almost 32 years ago, these gods decreed themselves the right to abort the very young people they now demand pay for their Alaskan cruises and bingo games, if they somehow managed to survive. Incredible.
If I were a person born after Jan. 22, 1973, I would say, “Let them eat dog food.”
As more and more baby boomers reach retirement age, they will continue to reap what they have sown. They have already suctioned, dismembered and decapitated their very own children, and by so doing decimated their own bodies, minds and souls.
Now, another of their pitiful harvests will be the lack of young workers paying into the Social Security system. Approximately one-third of them have been aborted.
And it’s not just aborted children who will never pay Social Security. Some of their children would now be nearing entry-level work age, but they have been offed as well.
Abortion just doesn’t kill children; it kills family trees.
When FDR’s commission designed Social Security in 1935, there were 42 workers paying benefits to each retiree. This year, it’s barely over 3 to 1. Soon, it will drop to 2 to 1.
My solution to alleviate the crisis is to add a couple questions to Social Security retirement registration forms.
The first would be: “Are you pro-choice?”
Applicants answering yes would have their Social Security benefits reduced by a sliding scale that multiplied the number of years they condoned abortion by the number of children aborted during those years.
The second question would be: “Have you ever had an abortion?” for women, and “Have you ever coerced your partner to abort or stood by silently as she made that ‘choice’?” for men.
Applicants answering yes to that question would have their Social Security benefits reduced by a sliding scale that multiplied the number of their abortions by the number of years ago they aborted.
But pro-choice seniors face more than financial woes. There is now also a critical shortage of health-care workers, because they, too, have been aborted.
My own profession, nursing, is in serious crisis, brought on by the aging population combined with a decrease – 20 percent since 1995 – of nursing school grads.
As financial constraints and health-care worker shortages intensify, the call to euthanize old people will also intensify. And why not? The very kids who survived the abortion holocaust will be the ones determining the fate of those who fought for the right to kill them only a few decades earlier. What goes around comes around.
Young health-care workers who were lucky enough to escape their mother’s uteruses alive might also note that aging pro-aborts are now fighting against providing pain relief to late-term babies who have been proven to feel the torture of being torn limb from limb while being aborted. Hmmm.
I wonder, as the growing number of unwanted old people increases, will Kate Michelman of NARAL Pro-Choice America take on the battle cry, “Every old person a wanted old person”?
Oh, I forgot. Michelman, age 62, has retired.
That leads me to wonder, when Kate is alone at night with her nightmares of chopped up babies, does she now worry about her own future?
I expect when old pro-aborts are as helpless as the babies they put to death so many years before, they will finally understand what all the fuss was about.
Ironically, they will then take comfort in the pro-life movement, which has taken on the fight against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide to save even enemies like Michelman and Gloria Steinem, age 70.
And they need not worry that children of pro-lifers will do unto them as they have done unto others. Our kids were raised to bless those who persecute them, to turn the other cheek, and even to wash the feet of their betrayers.
It is the young abortion proponents Michelman and Steinem will have to watch out for.