SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: epicure who wrote (1401)10/6/2000 12:17:45 PM
From: Zakrosian  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10042
 
Maybe the ultimate solution is Licensed Parenthood. Provide a reversible innoculation against pregnancy (like norplant?) for all fertile females and reverse it only when they express a desire for children and show the ability to support and care for them.
Could eliminate the demand for abortion, ensure better prenatal care, and prevent the birth of babies to parents who can't or won't provide their kids with a healthy environment.
It's a concept I find almost everyone disagrees with.



To: epicure who wrote (1401)10/6/2000 4:21:57 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10042
 
Especially the ones with birth defects?

Could you be more specific?

Are you referring to webbed feet and missing fingers, or thalidamide style defects and siamese twins?

Should the government mandate that parents be forced to abort all children with birth defects in order to avoid their becoming a burden on the healthcare system? (as they almost inevitably do)

Lots of scary questions in there X.....

But I think there are quite a few opportunities for adoption out there... far more than the planned parenthood types would like to acknowledge.

But then again, as far as I'm concerned, if a women hasn't made the choice to abort in the 1st term, then I opine that she has effectively waived her right to think only of herself with regard to the child she is carrying.