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: thames_sider who wrote (37062)	11/16/2001 8:42:29 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Actually, we separate parasites by their medical effect. Pregnancy is, by and large, a healthy condition for a woman. (It is child- bearing that is dangerous, although much less so under modern conditions). Parasites feed off of you to your detriment, they do not cause physical changes which enhance your stamina and make you "glow". Anyway, if pregnancy were a long term condition you might have a point. You might even have a point if the sex leading up to the pregnancy were a matter of rape. However, having undertaken the risk, it is not unreasonable to expect the woman to live with the consequences for a short while. Your attempt to kick down the "straw man" is likewise flawed. In fact, even if the woman could not find someone to take the infant off her hands, it is unlawful for her to abandon the child, or tend it with substandard care. As a practical matter, we do permit women to give up their children to orphanages or adoption, in an orderly manner, but until such time as the paperwork goes through and the transaction can be affected, we hold them responsible for the child's care. We would be asking little more in requiring them to carry to term before ridding themselves of the child........