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: Lane3 who wrote (78990)	11/12/2003 8:53:43 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

That is a load of spit if I ever saw one, and I have seen more than one. First, the people who extend them selves to care for unwanted children are generally (not always) anti-abortionists. This type of responsible individual is generally extended to the max in caring for others. X's remarks and your hypocritical 'Amen' are good examples of the unjust hatefulness directed toward this type of decent individual. Second, the pressure to abort fetuses is tremendous, legally and culturally around the world. You could say its not forced but China and India are not giving folks much of an alternative.

To: Lane3 who wrote (78990)	11/12/2003 9:25:28 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 82486

:-) Where there are so many angry people on both sides, it's always good to let people make up their own minds (if they have one), imo- if that is possible. And in this case it certainly is possible for the government to stay out of the question. There are few other issues, save for drug and sex laws, where the sides are so polarized. Drug use and sexual behavior should be questions also left to adults, I think, for the same reason that abortion is left to adults. While we have to legislate a baseline morality, for the already born, we should keep it focused as much as possible on the highly practical things we want to prevent- like already borns murdering or raping other already borns, or stealing, or physical brutality. Why? Because society doesn't function well if those things happen. Society functions just fine with abortion, and it would probably function less well (from my POV anyway) without it. It doesn't matter that you could use the same arguments to justify infanticide. That is irrelevant, and it is merely a desperate appeal to emotionalism. Nothing particularly wrong with infanticide- it just leads to a slippery slope of delineating a cut off in already born people which is difficult to resolve. Also, humans tend to get attached to things once they see them- and thus everything become much more emotional at that point- it's not logical, but it's the way people are, and must be taken into account. It also doesn't matter if fetuses are people, I don't really care if they are or aren't, and I don't see why it makes any logical difference. Our society kills people. We simply make choices about which ones it is ok to kill. People have always killed people. We even have precedents telling people which people it is ok for them to kill (the body of case law on self defense).

To: Lane3 who wrote (78990)	11/12/2003 9:31:28 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Did you know about this: National Politics & Policy \| Lawmakers Introduce Legislation That Would Suspend FDA Approval of Mifepristone for Use in Medical Abortion [Nov 07, 2003] As expected, Rep. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) on Thursday introduced legislation that would suspend FDA approval of mifepristone for use in medical abortions pending an audit by the General Accounting Office, Reuters Health reports (Rovner, Reuters Health, 11/6). The bill, called the "RU-486 Suspension and Review Act of 2003," would immediately suspend mifepristone's FDA approval and call for the GAO to conduct an independent review of the FDA's approval process of the drug. Some lawmakers have renewed their attempts to stop the U.S. sale of mifepristone after California teenager Holly Patterson in September died from complications related to a medical abortion. The Alameda County, Calif., Coroner's Office on Oct. 31 released a preliminary autopsy report that concluded that 18-year-old Patterson died of septic shock "due to endomyometritis (inflammation) due to therapeutic, drug-induced abortion." The preliminary report does not say that endomyometritis was directly caused by Patterson taking mifepristone or misoprostol -- which is used in conjunction with mifepristone for medical abortion -- and does not say whether the drugs were properly administered. The coroner's office is expected to release a final report later this month describing what part mifepristone played in Patterson's death. DeMint said the measure would also be known as "Holly's Law" in honor of Patterson (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 11/6). Monty and Helen Patterson, Holly's parents, at a news conference on Thursday called for others in similar situations to engage in "open family dialogue about unintended pregnancy," the Contra Costa Times reports (English, Contra Costa Times, 11/7). The measure, which is co-sponsored by 56 members of the House, will be introduced in the Senate by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), according to Reuters Health. Reaction DeMint said that mifepristone "is clearly a dangerous drug," adding that the legislation "is about the health of women, about the protection of their lives." Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) said that the FDA used a fast-track approval process for the drug, which is meant for treatments of "life-threatening ailments," according to Reuters Health. He added, "The last time I checked, pregnancy was not a disease" (Reuters Health, 11/7). Planned Parenthood Federation of America Vice President of Medical Affairs Vanessa Cullins said that since receiving FDA approval, mifepristone has been used "safely and effectively" by more than 200,000 women in the United States. She added that the drug is "an established and promising part of medicine." Cullins said, "This politically motivated legislation is a classic case of ideology versus legitimate medical science," adding, "No drug should be singled out for political purposes" (PPFA release, 11/6).