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.

Pastimes : Pro Choice Action Team -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Poet who wrote (45)	2/6/2001 12:16:20 PM
From: Mac Con Ulaidh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 948

It is looking like this thread will not be respected by those who are against a woman's right to choose. It is a shame that making it a moderated thread seems to be the only option, but it looks that way. I am not interested in having this issue turned into a debate about state's rights. I think anyone who is pro-choice would dismiss the idea of returning it to the states out-of-hand. I live in a state where I could be arrested at any time that an official of law-enforcement chose to arrest me (if I actually had a sex-life, that is. there's always hope?). The point is, IF I had one, they could arrest me if they chose to for being with my lover, in the privacy of our home. They could come into my home, and arrest me. And I should pay taxes? And want the state to make decisions concerning a woman's right to choose? Not. My town would not have me arrested. My county wouldn't. But they know me. My state would. I'm very glad to be a citizen of the U.S. FIRST, and leave the protection of my rights in their hands. Focusing on abortion rights on a national level is the only thing that makes sense to me. And I think anyone who says "I'm pro-choice, but want it on a state level" is being disengenuous.