Foreign Affairs Discussion Group 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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (212720)	1/12/2007 1:30:27 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) of 281500

I think mothers should decide, right up to a baby being a week old or, say, 9.1 months from conception. I don't think the baby is communal property until significantly after birth. Which is not to say a mother should be allowed to do cruelty or misuse a baby which she has decided to keep alive, even if temporarily. If she has a faulty baby, she might decide she wants it dead and she might want to try again with DNA testing to avoid the previous problem. For example, a friend of our son has a genetic defect which causes stomach cancer. He has just had his stomach removed 27 December. I consider it perfectly reasonable that a mother would not want to put her child through such a thing. Normally, such a problem should be handled by embryo checking and implantation if okay. But I can imagine things not being known until birth, then lifetime-long decisions have to be made in desperate circumstances. I would not dare to presume to order a mother to keep, or not keep, a baby. It should be her decision. Not mine. Or other busy-body bossy types. Mqurice

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next