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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (213277)	1/16/2007 9:36:09 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So you see no difference. If the rest of us do see a difference, what's the problem with you not having an abortion, and us having the choice?

To: steve harris who wrote (213277)	1/17/2007 10:20:27 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

A one year old child without assistance has 0% chance of viability, does it not? Well, not really. Not by the physiological definition, which is the one used in this area. The definition of viability is that one is physically fitted to live under normal circumstances. Early fetuses aren't, and it is only with the advanced care we give that they can hope to mature enough to survive off the machines and extra care. They aren't technically viable without this care. A one year old is viable under normal circumstances. Obviously refusing to feed or clothe it would be not normal. I imagine this difference of opinion is at the heart of when we pull plugs also. The blessing of advanced medical ability is also the curse.