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 : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorrie coey who wrote (5800)	3/15/2000 3:55:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 6418

No one forces one to become pregnant. No one forces one to keep the baby after birth. One is prevented (discouraged would be more like it, since there will be plenty of opportunity to evade the law) from taking steps that will lead to its death. Since you do not choose to address my points systematically, and I do not like mere reiteration, I will not rehearse arguments already made recently. The main thing is that every time the state makes you do anything, it is controlling your body, which is the instrument of action. Control is not the issue, whether the reason for the particular imposition suffices is the issue........By the way, no one is allowed to use deadly force against a trespasser, unless there is a reasonable threat to one's life. As for eviction, there are constraints against that under circumstances. For example, one can have an easement, which is a right to use a property established by custom. Thus, one might not even be a trespasser, even if there were never explicit permission to squat.......