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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (145169)	11/3/2008 4:18:04 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

wow Tim what an incredible stretch/straw man. You are saying that because the woman conceived of that fetus, she is not covered by basic human rights, as it pertains to that fetus? So in other words if you have a child who becomes and adult, basic human rights between the parent and that adult child are null and void because the parent conceived of the child? There are adults, disabled people who are dependent on their parents their entire lives. Does that mean if a disabled adult murders his parents its "ok" because he was conceived of by those parents? You know the problem with law is it is logical, or it tries to be in its purest form. I really thought you were a lot smarter than you seem to be when discussing these political topics. That might be a serious point when the fetus is the result of rape, but other than in such cases, the woman put the child in to a situation of dependence on her.