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: TH who wrote (111)	2/6/2001 9:20:49 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 948

Sticking to the main point: The cell I am referring to is on a specific path. That path will be realized, unless something, or someone interferes. That path is a human life. Very different from a cancer cell or a blood cell. My whole point was quite simple. At conception the die is cast and life has begun. Incorrect. When you say "life has begun" you are talking about what is. When you say that "that path will be realized" you are talking about what will be (actually, what may be, since spontaneous abortion occurs regularly, often without the mother's knowledge). They are different. The path to life is not life. It is potential life. A fertilized egg is not "alive" in any sense beyond that in which a blood cell is "alive". An infant is alive. Somewhere in between, life begins, and nobody, not you, not I, not all the doctors and theologians, can define exactly where that point lies. Pro-choicers claim they are for the free choice. A novel concept and it sounds very good. What does it really mean? It really means that women want to be able to choose whether or not they will incubate a potential life and turn it into an actual one. I don't think that's any more an issue of "slick marketing than the pro-life position. In fact, the pro-life position could also be called "slick marketing", since it clearly serves many agendas beyond the protection of life.