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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (18737)	7/19/2001 6:06:32 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Fine. It took awile to find these posts. SI's search engine isn't very good. I was starting to think that this specific area of discussion was a waste of time, likely to produce little light but a lot of heat, and not central to the overall topic or any of its main sub areas but you insisted. . Message 15984097 Your claim that legalizing abortions harms embryos is an odd one, and I am unsure why a non religious person would throw it in. It as if you think a smudge of cells is equal in value to somebodies mother. I don't get where you come from. It seems a very cold and calloused attitude. I believe you said that you don't believe in a soul entering the yolk, and that you don't believe that humans have any divine value over and above other life forms, and yet you still act as if every unwanted smudge of sperm should be forced into existence even if it means destroying the lives and the happiness of real living persons with families and loved ones. . Message 16025127 Well, that is the POINT, twfowler :)...MANY PEOPLE are sometimes these things !;)---but embryoys are NEVER these things! They are never hobos! Because embryos are not "most people", are they?? They are not ANY "PEOPLE". Maybe you get my point, now!! Maybe you don't. "They are sons or daughters" Begging the question again. Maybe you should invest in a dictionary. If you make up definitions, we will not get anywhere. Don't you know that?? The two entities have two different bodies, and abortion destroys one of them (and in some cases both). That is incorrect. As far as "who says so", well if we are talking about my own opinion of it I say so What kind of a justification is that?? Is your "say so" the "TRUTH"??? "if the organism entirely relies on outside support...and has no brain function, and has no chance to ever develop brain function, then even if the organism is still a human life and a member of the species homo-sapiens its right to life may not be very meaningful." What is this supposed to mean?? Are you God?? How do YOU know what has a chance to develop "brain function"??? What the F--- do you have to do with determining this for millions of women??? Who are YOU to determine what is "meaningful"...especially for somebody else?? And why is "brain function" the determinant of life--for you?? (MASTER??). You may have forgotten it...but your sperm don't thunk. . siliconinvestor.com Here you don't directly call anything a smuge or blob of sperm but you comment on your use of the term, and show that you used it delibertatly and in the context of disussing the thing that is aborted, which is either a fetus or an embryo. Before I do so, however--a brief comment on your question about the smudge of sperm. I use such terms in order to prevent the argument from picking up sentimental and illogical hitchhikers along the way, such as the shape of the embryo, fetus, etc. The world is full of natural and man made objects that look like persons but they are not. An argument for the RIGHTS of human growth should not rely on attributes such as the number of cells, the size of the human growth, and so forth.