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: Brumar89 who wrote (124841)	2/2/2001 11:24:10 AM
From: Johannes Pilch	Respond to of 769670

No, you've made an assertion which is unconvincing. I believe that the vast majority of people who call themselves prolife are unaware that a real application of prolife policy into law would outlaw such things as the use of birth control pills and IUD's for birth control and the morning after pill for rape victims. It is unconvincing because you are unwilling to see the plain facts before you. Indeed you submitted here a pro-life article claiming it supports your view when in fact it flatly presses against you, clearly rejecting the pill as a viable option for birth control. Moreover, and again, it is common knowledge that the “morning after” pill received its staunchest opposition from pro-lifers. The controversial abortion pill RU-486 will be shipped to hundreds of health clinics within days, making it widely available to American women for the first time after more than a decade of conflict and delay…. "We are saddened to learn that RU-486 will soon be in the marketplace," said Laura Echevarria, spokeswoman for the National Right to Life Committee. "We believe that many doctors are not going to be comfortable offering RU-486 because it will be a logistical nightmare, because they are opposed to abortion, or because they believe it will pose a public relations problem for them in both the medical community and among patients." washingtonpost.com The delay and conflict over RU-486 and the potential for public relations nightmare was created almost solely by pro-lifers. This militates against your view and supports mine. Now what evidence do you have that the “vast majority” of pro-lifers think as you claim? Thus far, you’ve only mentioned that pro-lifers have focused their attentions on abortuaries and other such venues as opposed to pill manufacturers. But this is no sound evidence, as the pill can be used for other purposes than abortion, and is but one of many methods used to murder children. It could well be the case that pro-lifers generally reject use of the pill on moral grounds, but choose to protest against the obvious murders that occur when abortionists puncture the back of an unborn child’s head and suck out its brain. You will have to do much better than empty speculation. I know of some people who call themselves prolife who have employed such things in their own life unawares. And if we could take a poll of prolife folks on this thread, I'd expect to find that some of them are currently using the pill or IUD's for birth control. Hehe. Well when you’ve taken your poll and presented its results, you’ll be on much firmer footing than the mindlessness we see currently. There is a real reticience on the part those prolife folks "in the know" like yourself to inform the public, including the prolife public, on the full implications of prolife positions. I’ve looked for this “reticence” of yours, and do not see it because you have given not a shred of support for it. Pro-lifers are not obligated by any sound line of reason to consistently protest pill manufacturers when the abortionist down the street literally murders unborn children.