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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (81549)	10/17/2009 12:35:51 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I believe we were discussing whether the dna mixed from two humans to make a fertilized egg has rights. My point was that (as it is not a human person) it has no rights--just as one cannot represent a chicken egg as a breeding rooster. We have laws against misrepresenting products in the grocery store. And we ought to honor conversation by avoiding deliberate misrepresentation...

To: TimF who wrote (81549)	10/17/2009 1:12:40 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

"No we aren't discussing whether DNA has rights but if humans have rights, specifically a subset of humans very early in their development." What I said was: "I believe we were discussing whether the dna mixed from two humans to make a fertilized egg has right" In case you are confused...the "dna mixed" refers to ALL stages after the sperm hits the egg. I am sorry this is difficult for you to follow.

To: TimF who wrote (81549)	10/21/2009 4:05:01 AM
From: Greg or e	1 Recommendation Respond to of 82486

A Person Among Us by La Shawn on October 20, 2009 in Child Killing lashawnbarber.com "I’ve always said technology was on the side of unborn babies, more than mere clumps of cells or globs of tissue. These tiny souls have heartbeats and reflexes, including reactions to pain. For these and many other reasons, I take what the “pro-choice” consider an extreme position. No matter how the baby was conceived or the financial or emotional state of the mother, unborn life should be protected. Period. Pro-life voters are pushing for personhood bills and amendments, which would declare that a fertilized egg is a person under the law. Implications are far-reaching, as you might expect. Such laws would impact birth control (which may thwart implantation of a fertilized egg), in vitro fertilization, and abortion itself. If a fertilized egg is legally declared a person, then destroying the fertilized egg, regardless of its stage of development, would be illegal. No personhood measure passed in the last election, but pro-life voters aren’t giving up. Michigan joins Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Missouri, Mississippi, and Montana in the effort to place personhood measures on state ballots. (Source) A pro-life Democrat, Rep. Jim Slezack, is a leading sponsor of the Michigan amendment. The measure reads: “Every human person has a right to life, which is the paramount and most fundamental right guaranteed under the constitution and laws of this state…With respect to the fundamental and inalienable right to life, the word ‘person’ applies to all human beings, irrespective of age, race, gender, health, function, condition of dependency, including physical or mental dependency, or method of reproduction, from the beginning of biological development, including fertilization.” Yes, pro-life Democrats exist. I had the pleasure of meeting and discussing this issue with pro-life Democrat and FOX News analyst Kirsten Powers. We also talked about it on Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air."