will do the job better

chanel earrings

Collective Care
Then in the future, even the mother, who has so far been so

indispensable, will not be needed for the birth of a child.

Soon science is going to find ways and means when a mother

will not need to carry the burden of a baby in her womb for

nine months.

A machine, a test tube, will do the job better. And then it

will be difficult to know the parentage of a child. Then the

whole social structure will have to be changed. Then all

women will play mothers and all men will play fathers to

children who will grow up under the collective care of the

community. For sure, everything is going to change.

Role Of Parents
What I am saying has become necessary because of the way

science is currently developing throughout the world. Now

when a child is born to you, you consult the best possible

physician about his health and upkeep; you don’t think that,

being his parent, you can treat your child medically, too. In

the same way, you go to a good tailor to have clothes made

for him; you may not sew them yourself because you are his

parent. Likewise, with the deepening of your understanding,

you will want your child to be born through much healthier

sperm than your own, so that he is endowed with a healthy

body and an intelligent mind.

On her part, a would-be mother would not like to drag on for

nine months with a baby in her womb when facilities will be

made available to grow a child externally in a better and

healthier manner. The function of parents, as it is today,

will then cease to be necessary. And with the cessation of

the function of parents, how will marriage itself exist? Then

the very basis of marriage will disappear. Technology on one

hand, and the science of man’s mind on the other, are

heading towards a point when individual claim on children

will come to an end.

among other factor has forced migration of jobs

chanel earrings

Both men were economical with the truth - that America's
over-indulgent lifestyle and expectations, combined with
pressure on corporate bottomlines in which much of US is
invested and the 24/7 work cycle (and not just cost
arbitrage) among other factor has forced migration of jobs.
Only once, towards the end, did Obama say that the "low-wage,
low-skill jobs" are not coming back and America has to
retrain its workers for better things.
It was one of the many testy moments of the night during
which both men showed ill-disguised contempt for each other's
political and economic philosophy. Obama went on the
offensive from the start, painting Romney as a plutocrat
whose policies only favored the rich. At one point, after
Obama had bashed Romney's investment in companies that
outsourced to China, the Republican came back to huffily
clarify that his investments over the last eight years have
been managed by a blind trust and asked the Obama if he had
looked at his own pension plans.
"I don't look at my pension. It's not as big as yours, so it
— it doesn't take as long," Obama gibed at the Republican.
Mr Romney: Well, let me — let me give you — (laughter) —
let me — let me give you some advice.
President Obama: I don't check it that often. (Chuckles.)
Mr Romney: Let me give you some advice. Look at your pension.
President Obama: (Chuckles.) OK.
Mr Romney: You also (have) investments in Chinese companies.
President Obama: Yeah.

the accusation couldn't have been further from the truth

chanel earrings

In politics, there's only one thing worse than being accused of schtupping a lobbyist: being accused of leaking the story of said schtupping to The New York Times. It was the latter accusation that John Weaver faced in February, after the Times published its front-page article on the "close bond" between John McCain and Vicki Iseman. And the circumstantial evidence against Weaver did seem rather damning. First, there was motive: Weaver was McCain's top strategist for nearly a decade, until he quit last year after his rival, Rick Davis, was appointed campaign manager. Second, there were fingerprints: Weaver had given the Times one of its only on-the-record quotes--telling the paper about a 1999 meeting with Iseman in which he warned her to stay away from McCain. And so, on the morning of the Times story, some McCain backers allied with Davis fingered Weaver as the Judas who had betrayed McCain, and their accusation soon echoed across blogs and cable news.
As it turned out, the accusation couldn't have been further from the truth. According to Weaver, he went on the record with the Times only because the paper had already learned about his confrontation with Iseman from other sources. What's more, Weaver says (and a McCain adviser confirms) he kept the campaign apprised of his dealings with the Times--sharing with the campaign his answers to the Times' questions. In other words, Weaver was acting in what he-- and, apparently, the McCain campaign--thought were McCain's best interests.
But that's hardly a surprise when you consider that, even after his acrimonious departure from the McCain campaign, Weaver has remained deeply committed to it. "I would like to say I've been detached," Weaver told me a few days after the Times story broke. "But not one day went by, including holidays, between the point I left and this week, when I didn't get a phone call or wasn't asked to make a call or multiple calls to help the current campaign leadership understand a situation or cajole a state leader to do something favorable. Whatever it was, I was happy to do." Indeed, it was around the time Weaver was supposedly stabbing McCain in the back that he was also quietly working to secure Mitt Romney's endorsement of the Arizona senator. As Rob Gray, a media consultant who has worked for McCain, puts it: "Weaver bleeds McCain." And, yet, that didn't stop some McCain supporters from trying to use the Times story to knife Weaver.