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

To: epicure who wrote (1520)	10/8/2000 1:29:15 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Abortions were illegal only after "quickening," the point at which a pregnant woman could feel the movements of the fetus (approximately the fourth month of pregnancy). How does that, in any way, disagree with what I've already posted about abortion in colonial times? I've already discussed quickening, and the fact that the fetus is so small and almost undetectable prior to 15 weeks, it only makes sense that common law judges would not treat an abortion in the 1st trimester as equivalent to one where the fetus had taken on a discernable human form with fingers, toes, and that nasty ability to kick. And it certainly fails in line with the ruling under Roe v. Wade which clearly indicates that the STATE has an interest in monitoring and limiting abortions past the 1st trimester, or IOW, the point of quickening. I can handle that kind of compromise... But I can't handle pro-abortionists attempting to prevent the state from having any say regarding late term abortions.. This is clearly against the compromise arrived at in Roe V. Wade and should be as aggressively opposed as vigorously as pro-choice people defend against those wish to prevent ALL abortions... But thank you for the reference anyway.. Regards, Ron