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: Neocon who wrote (32307)	2/5/1999 12:48:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Neocon, I consider your point of view reasonable. The idea of third trimester abortions is unpleasant for all to contemplate, but third trimester abortions are also quite rare, on the order of 1000 out of the 1.4 million annually. Yes, that's 1000 lives in some form or other, but at least some of those are due to extreme reasons too, medical or otherwise. Third trimester abortions are difficult to get, and legal restrictions are allowed under Roe v. Wade, right? To repeat an argument I've made to some ridicule here, there are something like 36000 fetal deaths in the 3rd trimester due to causes other than abortion. Some of those are no doubt unavoidable, but some could probably be prevented by better prenatal care. Offhand, I'd guess considerably more than 1000, but better prenatal care has nowhere near the political visibility or concern as late-term abortions. Rolling back the Roe v. Wade gestational times legally is fine with me, I've said before I consider that more honest that banning a particular medical procedure, as the PBA law would do. My main objection to the PBA rhetoric is the procedure often being described as if its primary purpose is to make sure the fetus is dead before it's "born". I think that's just plain false. As to "values", I just deleted a lot, it's a hard question. Kids do have to learn to make their own choices, and to be responsible. It's hard to discuss the particular choices involved in sex without offending somebody, but to not discuss it at all leaves kids to make sense of it themselves, with the broader "sex sells" culture and (often) peer pressure on one side, their personal morality and parental guidance on the other. I don't see "values" discussions as the nasty thing it's made out to be sometime, but beyond that, I don't know. Too often, the problem is lack of parental guidance, perhaps because of our traditional lack of openness on the subject. Attacking the broader "sex sells" culture might be good, but you're going up against business interests there, not filthy liberals.