Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53420)	6/17/1999 2:55:00 PM
From: lorrie coey	Respond to of 67261

Women decide who gets borne...PERIOD. They hate it!

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53420)	6/17/1999 3:17:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<what I'm referring to, which is legislation of a natural body function that in many cases one has no control over.>> Of course it would be silly for us to try to regulate nature. The Sun shines, period. However, for people who live in high altitude areas, I could imagine a regulation on the use of sun block, someday. As we are becoming more and more aware of the effects of the suns rays on skin cancer for people who live in high altitude areas. Lorries declaration that a woman decides period is too simplistic. Who knows how much longer all of us or any of us have in this human experience. A few years or millions. I don't know nor do you. The level of legislation we have today will seem barbaric in a few years if society continues. Legislation of course, demands more responsibility of citizens not less. The thing is when people are pregnant (and want the baby) they worry about everything. They go for prenatal care, they eat and take vitamins in consideration of the baby, they monitor their exercise (no rollerblades or diving boards please), they refrain from drinking and drugging, they have others help them with things they might otherwise do by themselves, etc. etc. etc. Even for these highly responsible people, sometimes something goes wrong and a miscarriage ensues, or the baby is born with a disability. I think that is in line with your point. Responsible people worry about the cause, because if it could have been avoided they want to avoid it in the future and help others to avoid the same thing. They worry until it is resolved, even if the resolution is no more money to pay the therapist. It is fine with me if resolutions that indicate a better circumstance in the future drive legislation.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53420)	6/17/1999 8:15:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Respond to of 67261

>I don't know, so yes perhaps a fetus is alive, but then so are my fingernails and hair and I cut them off routinely.< Fingernails and hair do not exist on the continuum of humanity. Were they left to themselves they will always be, at best, fingernails and hair. You are merely a clump of cells, just as is a fetus, albeit you are a greater clump of cells than most fetuses. Nevertheless some fetuses have more cells than other fetuses. Some adults have more cells than others. We then see the number of cells in a human organism presents to us no logical basis upon which we might rest a murder of one human over another. If, despite the barbarity of our doing so, we allow ourselves to kill on this principle, we merely claim the bigger one is, the less expendable one is. This is pure barbarism.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (53420)	6/17/1999 8:31:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

<<? I don't know, so yes perhaps a fetus is alive, but then so are my fingernails and hair and I cut them off routinely. Kitties are alive and we euthanise them legally.>> I forgot to mention. The part of your fingernails and hair that you routinely cut off do not contain living cells. The roots of you hair and the base of your cuticles are the only living parts. Kitties are another issue. Apples are alive and I eat them. So, what's your point? These are very odd comparisons. Unless you chew your, nails and barbecue kitties.