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: MulhollandDrive who wrote (58909)	8/19/1999 4:31:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

You are correct I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about child support payments. On this issue of what choice does a man have when it comes to pregnancy, he has a choice not to get involved physically with the women in the first place, just as she does. It gets really sticky when one person wants the baby and the other does not, which is I think where your questions lie... I beileve the position of the courts on this has been that the individual that wants the baby takes precedent, which I guess is the only way. I think where we differ is when 2 people get involved and an accidental pregnancy arises and neither wants the baby... it was an accident... I would say terminating the pregnancy is the best option. I rank the parent's wishes above all else. I'm willing to allow men a say in this matter as long as they have some responsibility... but in the past they never did, and I don't hear any pro-lifers suggesting that young men need any behavioral modification. In fact, the far right is so sexist in their beliefs I would assume their policies if implemented would probably be worse for women than the 50s were.