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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (10089)	1/27/2006 4:47:34 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 541556

The so-called pro-life groups, to debate this a bit, not only don't take into account the life of the woman in their position That isn't true. Edit - More generally, if we are to replace the group/movement/idea's own lable with our own derogatory one, they are likely to do the same, adding more heat and less light to disucssions. The abortion issue has more heat than light as it is. No need to add more.

To: JohnM who wrote (10089)	1/27/2006 4:56:14 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541556

By refusing to encourage the use of birth control devices and by opposing sex education. Indeed. I was very amused by a Michael Barone piece in US News recently on China. In one paragraph he belabors their population control by estimating that they would have had almost 300M more people (and this is good of course) if they had not had their horrid policies. These extra people are all needed since the population is rapidly ageing, and we all know how woeful Japan and Europe are for the same reason. A few paragraphs later, he blandly says, Whoa are the Chinese, they have 150M unemployed, and how the heck can they employ them effectively? LOL! More to the point, why anyone looks at unnormalised economic growth and calls it growth is beyond me. All US economic and budgetary data should only be reported normalised to avoid a lot of stupid claims (made by both Reps and Dems as it suits their cause).

To: JohnM who wrote (10089)	1/27/2006 5:24:53 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541556

You are welcome to walk in your section of the park. I agree with you that the label is inapt but I agree with Tim that we should all use the designated labels. Remember before we had officially designated labels and people used other labels as a wedge or a hammer? Then there came the truce and pro-choice and pro-life were designated so that everyone could be pro something and usage became standard. I firmly believe in civility. This is one small step toward collaboration. We can't solve any problem if we can't agree on the shape of the table. Using the designated labels shows a modicum of respect at least for the process if not the opponent. You can generally tell the reasonable from the unreasonable by whether they follow such simple protocols.