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: mark silvers who wrote (3774)	8/20/1999 4:19:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I should say that prior to conception, when there is not even a question of a baby, is pretty safe territory, Mark. Even now, it is possible to launch a wrongful death suit in some states if an injury caused spontaneous miscarriage. And yes, I think that some prenatal behavior ought to be culpable....Anyway, try taking it each step, and let us see where we arrive....

To: mark silvers who wrote (3774)	8/20/1999 6:00:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 769670

Mark there was an excellent piece on this in the New Yorker. You may have seen it because you used the same rollerblader example they used. But anyway the topic was, "why the supreme court can't overturn roe. v wade". The apparent rationale for overturning the ruling is that the fetus constitutes a life, but then there is that slippery slope of life and the human rights guaranteed under the constitution. It would seem to imply that a miscarriage could be murder, if you assume the fetus to posess human rights, but then miscarriage is a natural phenomenon so regulation is impossible. There would be cases where an induced miscarriage could be proven as negligence but then so many others, as in the rollerblade example where there probably was no intentional crime committed, and yet some overzealous attourney could probably make a case out of it if they wanted to.... etc. etc. What I don't know, is what was the premise for making abortion illegal in the first place if it did not rely on the presumption that a fetus has human rights. Was it an illegal procedure as dictated to the medical community primarily?

To: mark silvers who wrote (3774)	8/20/1999 9:55:00 PM
From: truedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

to: mark silvers from: truedog Mark, you are beginning to lose your reasoning powers. Human life begins when the sperm and the egg unite. Birth control and masturbation do not count because no life has yet begun.Any woman who can but refuses to eat right should be subject to some sort of penalty. If she can not afford to feed herself properly and the crud of the man who knocked her up will not provide, someone should be able to step in and give her the help she needs. Many churches perform such works for free. If she is pregnant, she has no business rollerblading but if she miscarries because of accident, she is blameless, IMO...TD