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: Bald Eagle who wrote (37130)	11/16/2001 8:48:49 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Remember I drew a severe line at about 24-28 weeks. I am not keen on a vacuum-induced abortion. But I don't think such would ever be used unless the mother - the poor host who is keeping the foetus alive with her own heart, her life, her blood - cannot see any other way through her travails. And if abortion was easier to come by, I doubt you'd see any. You don't think it's an easy decision, do you? (And, BTW, if someone found it was, would you expect them to be a mother to bear and raise children good for society?) Of course, if you can and will take the trauma, the pain, the cost (in time and incapacity) and the responsibility for a foetus whose mother cannot bear to give birth to it... and the woman agrees... well, go ahead. Do that pregnancy. Sign up, pay your taxes, pay for the mother's pain and the baby's life - however limited and pointless, if you believe it sacred then surely there is no limit to what you will pay? If you love children, then pay for those already born, and help their lives. Don't force children unwanted by their mothers to be thrust unknowing into a world which needs them not. Work to see that all children created and born are wanted. I don't think you believe that more unwanted, unneeded, miserable and maltreated children are better (for them or the world) than fewer, wanted, cared-for and cherished children? I see no women here arguing that they will bear and give birth to any and every offspring, however unwanted, however disabled, whatever the cost to themselves, whatever the danger. I see no reason why they should be forced to bear, to carry, to endure the agony of childbirth for a child they do not want. And then - sith they do not want it - to foist it on the state, to support and subsidise, at others' cost. And I see no way that any woman should be forced to host and give birth to a child she does not want to bear. </rant>