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.

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

To: Machaon who wrote (4061)	1/22/2003 8:25:04 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

Not true. Science can remove embryos, freeze them and store them for many years, until another host can be found. The can probably do the same thing with fetuses. They can freeze and store embryos but there can be damage. Fetuses can not be removed, frozen, unfrozen and reimplanted. The woman must survive outside the womb, without a host, therefore, the embryo and fetus should be given the same equal opportunity. That statement doesn't make any sense. If a great swimmer can swim the English channel does that mean it is fair that we dump you in the middle of the channel and keep anyone from rescuing you as you deserve the same "opportunity" to swim long distances?? By your logic, a woman who is not pregnant would be forced to carry the fetus of another woman, since you believe that women must be forced to bear fetuses that they don't want. The other women are not the child's parent. Also the other woman can not be forced to carry the child. There is no practical way to transfer the fetus. You are suggesting quite a slippery slope. Not at all. I am suggesting none of the things that you say I am suggesting. Tim

To: Machaon who wrote (4061)	1/22/2003 8:47:57 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7720

No one in this society survives in isolation. Not one of us, totally deprived of all support or assistance of other people, could survive. Well, maybe a few highly trained survivalists, but not forever, they would have to come out at some point for medical care or more tools or something. So the fact is that dependency is a fact of life. Some people are more dependent than others. Some are in hospitals and totally dependent on a nurse to feed them. Nurses stop feeding them, they die. The fetus is dependent on the mother until perhaps 8 months. But dependency is a fact of life. BTW, a totally unrelatd topic, well, related but different, with the evidence we now have of the importance of breast feeding, should the government require every woman who is physically capable of breastfeeding to breast feed her baby up to whatever time the breastfeeding is not required for health reasons? Should wilful refusal to breastfeed be punished as child abuse, just as withholding critical medicine or food would be?