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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (78909)	4/26/2000 7:49:00 AM
From: nihil	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

International law deals with conflicts between governments. Except in Europe, there is no individual international civil law. Your beliefs deny children their rights of personhood merely because of age. On the same principle, the bad judgment of crazy old people should deny them their rights. I believe that children (unless they are hopelessly incapacited) should have broad rights to make up their own minds about questions of politics, religion, custody, education, love and sex and marriage. Safeguards are necessary, but adults, the courts, and parents IMO should have limited control over children and their wishes. I don't think an adult should have any more right to hit of confine a child than he does to hit or confine an adult. I don't think an adult has any right to tell a child what to believe. I think a child should have an absolute right to an abortion regardless of the age or state of the fetus. As for fetuses in utero, I think they have no rights opposed to their mothers whose possessions they are. I think the mother has the absolute right to have the fetus removed. I think their legal rights against anyone else should be extended far beyond anything they have today. I don't think, for instance, that the abortionist has a right to kill the fetus even on the instructions of the mother. I think the abortionist and the hospital or clinic, have an obligation to remove the fetus in the way that both protects the mother's health and maximizes the chance of survival of the fetus ex utero. I believe it is safe to let the first trimester fetus die but not be killed. I think the third trimester fetus can usually be saved, and must be. Any physician who kills or lets a third trimester fetus die from neglect, IMO commits murder. We need rules based on recent experience about the measures the abortionist can take on second trimester fetuses. As for completely disabled old people, most of them should be allowed to die. "Thou shalt not kill, but need not strive, officiously to keep alive." As long as one expert physician believes that he or she can pull the moribund oldster from the brink into some kind of sentient life he should be allowed to try and be reimbursed by any insurance the oldster has. This is the decision of the oldster in his living will. If he wasn't interested enough to leave instructions, let him die. If he was, then follow the instructions. My instructions are that I should be kept alive as long as medical opinion holds that I have a non-zero chance of recovery to rational self-consciousness, or, as long as my continued life increases present value of cash flow for my family.