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: YlangYlangBreeze who wrote (633)	2/22/2001 7:44:05 PM
From: Machaon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 948

<< Is there any circumstance under which you feel abortion is justifiable? >> Only when the soul of the fetus goes to Heaven. Only then is it a good thing. There are a lot of anti-abortion people with very weak faith in their religion. If they truly believed in God and in Heaven, they would welcome abortion and the great joy and wealth that the soul of the fetus is given for eternity. It's a question of whether they truly believe in Heaven, or are just driven by questionable dogma.

To: YlangYlangBreeze who wrote (633)	2/26/2001 5:49:18 PM
From: Peter O'Brien	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 948

>Is there any circumstance under which you feel abortion is justifiable? I'm generally pro-life, but I think a logical case can be made for an exception in the case of rape. Consider the following hypothetical: Person A attacks and stabs Person B. Person B is rushed to the hospital, and it is determined that Person B will need an immediate blood donation (and some operations that will require a series of transfusions over the next nine months) in order to survive. Person B has an extremely rare blood type. In fact, in a strange coincidence, it turns out that Person A is the only other person in the world with the same blood type. The blood donations required by Person B would not be fatal to person A. Is Person A's right to their own body absolute? Or, can the government force person A to give blood donations to save the life of Person B? Does your answer change if the only other possible blood donor is a completely unrelated Person C (instead of Person A)? Person C would certainly be a "good Samaritan" to donate blood to save the life of Person B. But should the government be able to force Person C to donate blood?