SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (20475)6/17/2005 2:34:56 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 28931
 
The mother no longer has any direct rights to the property inside her body--not her kidney, not her liver, not her zygote, and not her fetus. Whether society now has rights to her property in the absence of instructions from the mother to the contrary--is certainly an interesting point.



To: Oeconomicus who wrote (20475)6/18/2005 11:53:21 AM
From: TigerPaw  Respond to of 28931
 
a fetus is an extension of the mother until the cord is cut

I would presume that the mother wanted the child or this effort would not be made. It's not that the fetus suddenly has all these rights, it's still the rights of the mother as interpreted by her next of kin.

TP


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News