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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (2410)	7/29/1999 3:13:00 PM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Neo-- Okay... that's a lot, so if you don't mind I'll take one at a time, and probably one a day.......I'll start at the bottom and work my way up(Republicans like that):-) <<1.) The absolute right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy at any point does violence to the whole concept of paternity. Since it is her decision to carry the baby, it is her baby. The law has not caught up with the logical implications yet, but it will;>> I'm not sure what you mean by "violence to the whole concept of paternity". Yes it is her baby and her body. Their may not have been any decision to carry a baby. It could be a mistake, it could have been forced on her(rape/incest), she may have been drunk, or any other reason. either way, it is her body. IMO, the baby is of secondary import until it is born. There is a very real question of weather anyone has the right to tell anyone else what to do with their body. we all have our own opinions, but the question is legitimate. What will and willnot happen in regards to the law is supposition at best. <<.) Therefore, abortion weakens the connections between fathers and their progeny, and weakens the male concern with the consequences of sex, making men even more inclined to predatory behavior and abandonment;>> This whole statement is one large supposition. It is an opinion and to say simply no, that isn't the effect is just as reasonable. Because a women can have an abortion, it does not logicaly follow that men will care less about their children and be more prone to abandoning them. by predatory behaviour, do you mean rape? I don't think men will be more likely to rape women because they can abort the fetus if there is one. I'm not sure this what you mean, so I am hesitant to put words in your mouth. <<) Furthermore, a liberal abortion regime invites abuse, since it denies that there is any hurdle that must be passed to obtain an abortion. Thus, it has been documented that many women use abortion as a means of sex selection--- ironically, primarily to abort females. It also creates the moral hazard of laxity with birth control, which has also been documented;>> There are also studies which say that isn't true. It is possible to find examples of any sort of behavior, but that doesn't make it statisticly relevant. I personally have heard of few women using abortion as gender control or even as birth control. few women are so callous to children. Abortion is a very emotinal and distressing thing for a women to go through, most wouldn't use it as a back-up for forgetting to take their pill. I have to finish something at work. I will try to get back to the rest later.... Mark

To: Neocon who wrote (2410)	7/29/1999 4:51:00 PM
From: mark silvers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Neo-- Okay, now for the rest.... <<Additionally, a liberal abortion regime makes it likely that genetic defects, such as Down's syndrome, will become less acceptable, since those who give birth to such people will be viewed as irresponsible for not having had an abortion;>> In no such way hs that happened since we have had abortion, what makes you think it will happen in the future? the fact is that organizations like Special Olympics appear to be thriving. acceptance of defects is becoming more the norm rather than the opposite. << Abortion necessarily damages the sense of the sacredness of maternity, because unborn children are at any moment disposable should the woman choose to do so. That may not matter when the woman is fully committed to the birth, but what about those who are ambivalent, and may decide that they should have aborted after the child is born? Has abortion impacted on the rise of child abuse and abandonment?;>> I can not honestly answer that question. I haven't the slightest idea if it leads to greater child abuse. I have never heard anyone use that as an excuse, but I wouldn't be in a position to hear it either..... <<The existence of late term, and especially partial birth, abortion obliterates any distinction between the unborn child and the neonate, except condition of dependency, and legitimizes infanticide, such as the couple of incidents where middle class girls gave birth at proms and dumped the babies;>> I think it is a stretch to say that late term abortions are the reason that those girls dumped their babies. In fact, we could make the arument that without the optin, they would have had no choice BUT to dump them(in their minds). That said, I personally am against late term abortion, unless it is a matter of life and death for the mother. <<The widespread prevalence of abortion threatens to rend the social fabric, given the depth of feeling on both sides, and should not depend on a flawed Supreme Court decision;>> It is just as rational to say that the insistence of pro lifers to continue the fight threatens to tear the social fabric of society, because they will not accept the laws of the land as decided by the supreme court. <<Therefore Roe v Wade should be overturned, and the matter should go back to the states, where conservatives should work to enact as many restrictions on abortion as are politically feasible, and ban it if possible, except in instances of rape, incest, or serious health risk.>> Therefore pro lifers should accept the lasw that were handed down and leave it at that. Mark