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 : Violence against women -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AmericanVoter who wrote (10)	12/14/2002 12:48:27 AM
From: David Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 79

>>secondly, I did not write that article, so, I can not be accused of using flawed arguments... Why not? As has been pointed out, some of the purported facts contained in the article are clear falsehoods.You chose to use it in the header of this thread without any qualifications. If you don't want to qualify the veracity of the article, then you should be prepared to be challenged on it. >>...where the abused women would rather be, I really don't know, do you ? That is indeed difficult to determine since hundreds of millions of these women live in countries and/or societies where they cannot speak freely without the risk of serious retribution.

To: AmericanVoter who wrote (10)	12/14/2002 2:29:33 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Respond to of 79

If no men existed on this planet, there would still be violence against women everywhere. That's easy even without your flawed documentation. Tonya Harding aside, try Countess Elizabeth Báthory. She killed about 650 women on the belief that bathing in their blood would keep her young. That was some 400 years ago. We've advanced from that somewhat, in this century. Speaking of this century: We also don't stone women to death for being single mothers: smh.com.au Time to crawl out of the Dark Ages. Modern Civilization means more than just replacing the family camel with a Toyota pickup truck.