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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (124148)	1/29/2001 12:09:39 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

So if you have the means to save the life of a sick person but chose not to use it, that's okay? If saving the life of a sick person means we must slaughter innocents who have no direct link at all to that sick person, then we must attempt to save the sick person by other means. We cannot simply save the sick person by murdering others. That is utterly barbaric. How is it that the pro-life crowd gets so fixated on abortion that they wind up elevating the right to life of a six-week embryo above the right to life of living, breathing human beings? For two reasons: 1. The human embryo is naturally self-expressing even at six-weeks. Indeed it is self-expressing even at conception and as such leaves us no means to objectively declare it not part of the human family. "Choicers" ache to devalue human life, but they cannot do it with reason. So they simply declare, ipso facto, that some humans are not human. Then they murder on this basis. That is barbarism. The unborn child, even at conception, is us. It cannot yet crawl, just as my baby daughter cannot yet speak, and as my three year-old son cannot yet build a space shuttle. But it is obviously us, and already self-actualizing on the human continuum. When we kill it, we kill ourselves and that is a sin against the decree of nature. 2. Because in the case of the “breathing humans” you mention above, saving them requires the murder of humans who breathe by means other than lungs. There is nothing objectively apparent that allows us to determine lung breathing humans more worthy of life than humans who breathe otherwise. When pro-lifers “fixate” on the six-week old embryo, they “fixate” on human principle, the thing that gives freedom of life and expression to us all.