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: TigerPaw who wrote (160530)	7/13/2001 4:28:58 PM
From: cAPSLOCK	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Sorry to hear of the difficult situation you had to face Tiger... also - am glad that it has turned out well in the end. In my personal opinion your choice not to induce heroic measures was perfectly honorable. The definition of legal personhood begins at conception leads to lots of contradictions and random exceptions, while the legal concept that personhood begins at birth works well. Good. Now we are on the right point. This is the center of the argument. I would like specific reason of "contradictions and random exceptions", and why the concept of 'at birth' works well? What changes specifically in the fetus when it crosses through the birth canal? I can onlt think of a few things. It is outside, and it must breathe. The series of changes that begin at fertilization are PROFOUND and do not stop until death. In your brain of brains you should examine some of the ramifications of taking your position to it's conclusion. Will a women be arrested for feigning a headache to avoid sex that could have resulted in a conception? She prevented potential life didn't she? Of course not. You are moving the focus of the 'crime' from terminating a human life (in my view) or cell mass (in your's) willingly - to choosing not to have sex. There is a big difference. But the crux remains. My argument would go along the lines of: "the headache scenario is only about potential, and abortion is about life already realized" But I would guess we would disagree on this point. Still you cannot really believe that the 'potential life' is the same before conception (and before intercourse for that matter) and after? Certainly you believe that some sort of threshold has been crossed after an egg is fertilized. I can accept you believe that that threshold does not include the title: "individual human life" although I would disagree. By the way... my wife is the better part of a month late for her period. If it means what we are starting to believe it might mean this will is our first child. regards, cAPSLOCK