Evolution Message Board - Msg: 27054003

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 : Evolution

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (11585)	12/28/2010 6:08:58 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) of 69300

That would be an excellent policy if the stakes weren't so high. Since I am not religious, I don't have a presupplied interest in the sanctity of life. I need to use other moral yardsticks, and the one that comes easiest to hand is that of relative benefit. Abortion is a powerful tool for allaying the suffering that comes hand-in-hand with unwanted pregnancy. I consider the likelihood and the severity of that suffering to be a more serious consideration than the continuation of, say, a first-trimester pregnancy. The obvious counterproposal is, Don't become pregnant. That is good policy, but manure doth occur. I consider sexual continence to be barbarous if imposed ... for those who choose it I say go with it. But people will have sex. Contraception will fail, sometimes in best faith, often because it wasn't used with sufficient foresight. I need a reason other than ideology (including but not limited to religion) to say that an unwanted pregnancy must be carried through to term. Otherwise I see such a policy as punitive, and that would offend me. Scaring young people into keeping it zipped has proven ineffective and (imo) cruel.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next