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: Lane3 who wrote (3530)1/4/2003 7:54:08 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7720
 
If you accept birth as the start of the legal existence of a person (thought I don't know where you get that the Constitution assumes that), then there is no basis for preventing or limiting partial birth abortion, and for a person to destroy a fetus in utero, not matter how advanced, or even as it is being born, cannot be a crime against a person.



To: Lane3 who wrote (3530)1/6/2003 3:40:06 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 7720
 
just where the Constitution assumes it to be

The constitution directly states no such thing, nor can I see where it even hints at the idea.

Tim


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