SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (3526)1/4/2003 5:10:43 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7720
 
<<If the treatment is usual and customary, not extraordinary; if the person is not in the process of imminent, inevitable death; and/or if the person is not in a persistent vegatative state (i.e., brain dead), then withdrawing treatment is, indeed, homicide, and one can be charged and convicted.>>

I recently read an article where hospitals have been using blood thinners for young people who have head injuries. It quickens the brain death and recruits more organ doners.



To: Neocon who wrote (3526)1/5/2003 6:41:24 AM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 7720
 
My point is only that protections granted to a fetus should not be greater than the protections it would have after birth. An absolute ban on abortions would do just that. If laws were to be passed banning abortions, it seems to me that the upper limit would be the protections afforded citizens, for example, an exemption to protect the woman carrying the fetus.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News