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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (659227)	11/10/2004 9:52:05 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

In this form of the pro- choice argument, the fetus is regarded as a parasite, and autonomy means that one is free to decline acting as a host. Of course, this ignores that the fetus is human and capable of living externally from about the fifth month on, and therefore that some number of abortions, whatever the precise determination may be, must be regarded as the equivalent to infancticide. Challenged in this way, the pro- choicer will come back with the idea that on cannot be compelled to give a kidney, for example. However, a woman can be compelled to attend to her child until such time as foster care of some sort may be arranged. The fact is that carrying a child to term does not, by itself, constitute an onerous burden, especially if there are rape/incest exceptions, so that whatever risk of pregnancy there is was run voluntarily.