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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Machaon who wrote (4539)	9/10/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

I am not a doctor. But, President Clinton would've accepted the ban on partial birth abortion, if it could still be used if the mother's life or health were threatened. C.Everett Koop is a doctor ( pediatrician in fact ) and just yesterday said the President had been misled by advisors on PBA. He said the PBA is NEVER needed to save a mother's life.

To: Machaon who wrote (4539)	9/10/1998 2:48:00 PM
From: Sedohr Nod	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

If i understand the process correctly, the woman has already carried the "badly deformed fetus" to a point where a "natural" birth has already commenced.....at which point the "badly deformed fetus" has it's head punctured at the base of the skull and great damage is done to cause death.......but that the delivery is through the birth canal.....again if the delivery through normal "channels"....just how does that save the life of the woman?....if i remember correctly even the a.m.a. couldn't come up with a good reason for the process....please tell me what i have wrong on this?