SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TigerPaw who wrote (357732)2/12/2003 9:47:00 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) of 769670
 
You are stating the obvious. I am sorry that you are having a conceptual problem with this. The autonomy argument does not have to do with possible consequences, but with the right to control one's body. There is no such absolute right, and the imposition in requiring that the child be brought to term does not, in itself, constitute an undue burden. Obviously, autonomy is trumped during the period in question, the question is whether it is disrespected overall. No amount of providing motivation for having an abortion addresses the argument: there is generally motivation to break a law. We do not let people decide for themselves about committing infanticide, once the child is born, regardless of rationale. We do not let men kill their wive's lovers, in hope of preserving their families. We do not let thieves get away scot free because they might not otherwise have gotten to send their children to Harvard. The only issue is where the right to control one's body ends, and the state's interest in upholding the sanctity of life begins.......
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News