The Boxing Ring Revived 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.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (3409)	12/13/2002 5:06:03 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) of 7720

I was not really arguing, I was reacting to an article that Tim posted. Of course, the context is "if abortion policy became restrictive". There is nothing controversial about the sanctity of life. What is controversial is how to weigh to conflict between that value and autonomy. I gave my view as to why the controversy should resolve itself in the direction of restrictiveness. In any event, weighing it in favor of the sanctity of life would not be a "legal usurpation of autonomy", it would be acting in accord with a view that is so set against treating human beings like trash that it will not even risk erring with a first trimester fetus. (As you recall, I think that there should be leniency at that point in the pregnancy). Why should someone who is biased to excuse her abortion "make the decision" for the fetus about whether it is worth living in an orphanage or foster home? That is absurd. If the fetus cannot make a choice, society has to go on probabilities, and from all I know, it is probably good enough to have institutional care, granting other arrangements would be better....

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next