Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK 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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Johnathan C. Doe who wrote (38187)	3/12/1999 7:54:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) of 67261

>Actually; isn't the place to start; the sex act leading to the unwanted baby. Shouldn't premarital sex be the start of the CRIME and so shouldn't that be the place to criminalize the whole thing.< We must not drag ourselves from the topic at hand, Jonathan. We are not judging crime, modes of reproduction or sexual activities. We are attempting to use reason to judge whether the principle supporting general abortion use is sound-- fit to be applied by a civilized people to human relations. Abortion may occur at the end of any act that results in a conceptus. This might include premarital sex, marital sex or the asexual steps prior to in-vitro fertilization. None of these is the principle (philosophical basis) upon which abortion rests, and therefore they are not the place to start judging the abortion principle. Abortion exterminates a human fetus, and so to reason over the feasibility of its application by a civilized people to human relations we must first determine the philosophical basis upon which a person deems the fetus “exterminatable”. Abortion acceptance necessarily stems from this philosophy, and so here is where we must start. >Why wait to start with the situation with the fetus in the mother. Shouldn't it on principle be crimnal to impregnate an unmarried woman? On principle; it is like driving drunk; you don't have to hit anything to have it be a crime.< This is a question that is irrelevant to the principle upon which abortion rests. We might debate the principle supporting pre-marital sex at a later time. >Wouldn't crimnalizing the sex act be the better place to discourage everyone; then you won't have all these babies to deal with. Now that is the direction you folks need to be going in.< Again. The issue concerns the principle supporting abortion. We might discus the principle supporting sex at a later time. Should we determine sex inappropriate for a civilized society to apply to human relations, then we might work together to make it criminal. We might do the same thing with eating and breathing also. For now let us stick with abortion, trying not to wallow hither and yon in lunacy.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next