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 (678715)	4/11/2005 11:59:18 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Proconfusion... I see that whenever you can't answer inconvenient questions you attempt to cover-up by wading in filth and lies. Increasingly you are proving yourself to be beneath contempt... a foul-minded rabble-rousing Luddite, with deep, deep personal problems.... Re: "you keep mumbling over the same tripe, Buffy..he already proved he was no husband. He should have had all rights of a husband stripped from him. The way you carry on over the guy, me thinks that you have a wife AND a boyfriend,and you are just trying to justify it.....take it up with your shrink." =========================================================== Unanswered questions. =========================================================== Re: "you killed her too." BULL! You are turning psychotic. Now maybe you can calm down, and muster up sufficient guts to try answering the following two simple questions? (I know, I know... I've asked you and asked you politely over and over... but you always shut up real fast and head for the hills. Oh well, one more 'old college try'): Re: "You don't pull the plug on someone over the objections of family members, certainly not parents." 1) But that's how traditional marriage law has been for many HUNDREDS of years --- dating to before we were even a country, dating to English common law and earlier. When a couple marries, the parent's 'rights' over their actions are voided. The couple become a new whole, bonded to each other. To change that, to grant rights to parents over their married offspring, you'd have to TOTALLY REDEFINE TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE. It would be a mere shell of what it is now. (Hell, with 'gay marriage' all you've got is more people wanting to gain the exact same legal rights that marrieds have today... but if you WIPE AWAY THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF MARRIAGE, then you have redefined to whole thing. It wouldn't be marriage any more, it would be co-habitation. Childhood would NEVER end!) 2) If 'parents gain an over-riding legal control' over their married offspring... then would the grandparents have an over-ride over THOSE decisions? Would the greatgrandparents be able to over-ride even that?????? Now, as to the claim that "the man was NO husband to her", all I can point out is: Since neither of us know any of the principles, all we have are the media propaganda efforts of the two sides to inform us... and that is not enough to know ANYTHING of the truth. I've heard stories, too... like that the parents had no interest in these matters until there was a large malpractice award sitting in the couple's bank account... but at least I realize that these may just be stories, and I have no way of knowing the truth, what is truly in their hearts, and what their motivations are.