Sharks in the Septic Tank Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (38478)	11/23/2001 8:33:36 PM
From: maried.	Read Replies (2) of 82486

Pardon my intrusion, gentlemen, but I am confused as to what your argument is in these posts. It appears that you, Solon, are saying, 100% of these rulings on this issue have supported the right to kill* the fetus in cases where the "woman's life is endangered by physical disorder, physical illness or physical injury".* and I think the woman and her husband and society would normally fight to preserve her life and not that of her fetus. And J.C. says, Would leaving the fetus within a mother who may die be favoring the fetus? Would removing the fetus from the mother be favoring the fetus? The only difference that I see between your questions or statements is the word kill. If a mother's life is in danger, the life of that woman is paramount. The fetus/child cannot live without it's mother's womb and nutrients. If a fetus/child is developed enough to survive outside the womb, a caesarian is performed and the child and mother are treated as two separate lives. Certainly, the courts do not use the word kill when referring to these rare exceptions. Where is the difference in your positions? Marie

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next