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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (10872)	10/23/1998 12:32:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

<<Nobody likes abortions in general, it's not something women do for pleasure, and it's not like breast enhancement surgery or something.>> Breast enhancement surgery is very close to what it is like. No body likes going under the knife, but hey, if it brings back or enhances some feminine feature that makes your female attraction more viable, what the heck? Not for pleasure? So you are saying the millions performed in the USA are for what purpose? Medical, Saving the Mother's life? I am certain that those are the rare and small percentage, but you are the board statistician. It is not because the Mother (and you use that term very loosely) wants to rid her self of this stigma and responsibility so that she can maintain her availability for action in other areas? That's presumptuous of you. If you can convince me with the "substantive and factual" proof you so commonly call for from others, you will have converted me man. I don't believe you can provide that. It was you who took this bold stand that it's not for pleasure. I'm guessing in the majority of cases that is all it is for. <<so PBA ban isn't going to get you far toward your goal.>> Goal what goal? Not liking the abandonment of a human life? Not approving of the deliberate destruction of a human life? Resistance to any aspect of Infanticide? You are on fire with the birth control as the only sensible resolution to a wild fire of abortions. Can you consider just for a moment the possibility of support for the idea that a culture founded on monogamous long term relationships is not such a horrible thought. Of course then that might open the door to ideas about marriage or families being a good thing. OK, sorry I know I've gone way over board here. Your point is that attending to the PBA issue does not solve the abortion issue in general. Hmmmmm....If we stop the murders of old women running pon shops in downtown Denver does it get us closer to our goal? What goal, crime in America? Darn, that shoplifter in Cincinnati got away with it. We were way off base going after the murderer I guess. This is your logic Dan.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (10872)	10/23/1998 9:51:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

If you want to get sanctimonious about "life", how about comparing # of PBA's to # of handgun deaths in the U.S.? Just to throw in another hot-button issue. Want me to dig up some numbers for you? Indeed I do. Considering that the single statistic I have seen on PBA's was that in 1985, in the State of, I believe it was Ohio, there were about 1,000 PBA's. Also, I have heard that a PBA does not in any way save a mother's life. The reason being, the baby is 95% naturally birthed (i.e. "partial birth"), with only the head still inside the mother, when the scissors are plunged into the base of the skull. 1) If the baby is that far birthed, then the final 5% coming out into the world isn't going to hazard the mother. 2) Why the brutality towards this fetus, with the scissors and "skull evacuation"? The answer is the doctor is afraid the fetus will live. His orders are to abort a "blob of tissue" called a fetus, so he can't take a chance on having a beating heart and brainwaves joined by lungs sucking oxygen. Let's hear your PBA vs. handgun #s. Perhaps with the 'net this weekend, you can dig up some numbers for us.