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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (29689)	1/31/1999 3:19:00 PM
From: Edwarda	Respond to of 108807

Get a grip, Bob. It was a declaration of the rights of all men, women, and children in the world. It was not a gift.

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (29689)	1/31/1999 3:22:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 108807

Bob: There is no New World Order. Most US citizens wouldn't put up with it. When it comes down to it, the people of the USA really can be pushed only so far. FT

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (29689)	1/31/1999 6:12:00 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

All rights can be changed at any time. the only difference is in the mechanism of change. Our Constitution specifies the specific and rather difficult ways in which our Constitution can be changed. Our Constitution could recognize the fetus as a person from conception- I see no reason why that could not be put in by a majority should the majority be able to jump through the necessary hoops. Then the fetus could not be deprived of life without due process- which would be interesting. For me neither situation is right or wrong- they are both possible, they both make some logical sense, just because things are the way they are now doesn't mean they could not just as easily be another way.