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

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20781)	6/30/2005 2:18:08 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Alabama unequal rights: Law: Women are able to retain all property they owned prior to marriage in the case of divorce. However, this provision does not apply to men. Country: United States Citation: Section 30-4-1 Separate property of wife - Property held prior to marriage or acquired after marriage. All property of the wife, held by her previous to the marriage or to which she may become entitled after the marriage in any manner, is the separate property of the wife and is not subject to the liabilities of the husband. (Code 1886, §2341; Code 1896, §2520; Code 1907, §4486; Code 1923, §8261; Code 1940, T. 34, §65.)

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20781)	6/30/2005 2:42:09 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

Hmm. By "self-aware", do you mean "the capacity to become the object of one's attention" or "to see oneself as one is seen by others"? Some people never achieve the latter, BTW. ;-) As for your idea that "children should begin to get their own rights ... somewhere after age one and before age five" and that "prior to that they have a variety of animal rights", by that standard, infanticide could be considered perfectly acceptable if either done out of one's idea of "mercy" (as in putting down a wounded animal) or simply because the child isn't wanted (as in putting down a dog that is deemed unadoptable). The only "rights" that are or should be withheld from children are either really just legal privileges of law abiding adults(e.g. driving a car, voting) or withheld for the protection of the child because he (or she) is not yet able to protect himself (e.g. not being able to smoke, drink, consent to sex, enter into contracts, etc.). These are all just modest restrictions on their liberty. But if they are not deemed a "person with rights", as we like to say here, then much more basic rights are in jeopardy. Self-awareness is a poor standard, TP.