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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (202315)	9/16/2004 12:43:30 AM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 1572619

If the rules go back to what they were, self-defense would not hold up. It didn't for my Mom. The rules should not go back to what they were. She almost died. I'm the only one in my family (other than my Dad) that she told about the extreme humiliation her insurance company and more specifically her hospital made her go through to achieve contraceptive after almost dieing in pregnancy. By their rule book, only a sinner would use a contraceptive to avoid a death even after she had almost died once. Also by their book, the mother should die, not the child. Even if the mother has half a dozen children dependent upon her. I think the women in Congress need to begin a bill that gives women the right to remain alive and a health clause to do so, so it is crystal clear women have this right. Trust me, if they don't, women will no longer have this right to remain alive. If your OBGYN is voting for Bush, find a different OBGYN so your life isn't put on the line. This is serious. I don't think anyone on this thread would object to passing a law that gives women a health clause so they have the right to remain alive. I think Congress needs to pass such a bill, before it is too late. Regards, Amy J