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: Johannes Pilch who wrote (125072)	2/3/2001 10:27:28 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I have argued it even on this particular thread, before you came along, pal. (see below) . . . The examples of your outspokenness you list are all about a week old. Whatever, I'll take your word about your personal past opinions. Do I think the “morning after” pill should be forbidden? Unequivocally yes, because the child that comes about from rape is innocent. But I can tolerate laws allowing the use of the “morning after” pill in the case of rape because the mitigating circumstances . . . You seem to be taking two positions on the question of the morning after pill for rape victims in the same paragraph. First you say it should be unequivocally outlawed. But in the next sentence, you can tolerate it. If prolife policies are enacted into law, it'll have to be one or the other. If you're going to tolerate the morning after pill even though it murders an innocent life - what else will you tolerate?