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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (1932)	3/5/1999 12:48:00 PM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13062

Neocon when you say, "Do you object to democracy?" do you believe that the majority should be able to vote to violate the rights of the minority? There was a time in this country when the majority of voters believed that slavery was ok. Can you explain how your rape and incest exceptions to your pro coat hanger beliefs are logical? If the fetus is in fact a human being with full rights, how does being the innocent victim of a crime qualify it for death? I assume the exception for incest is because of the higher incidence of birth defects, but you rail against people that won't bring children with known defects into the world to suffer. Incest by itself is no guarantee that the child will be defective, so lot's of perfectly heathy children would be wiped out with that exception. When the fetus can be transplanted into the mans body to be carried to term, then and only then will he have the right to demand that the baby be carried to term. Barb

To: Neocon who wrote (1932)	3/5/1999 3:20:00 PM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13062

1. That is wrong, because there has been several cases of this occurring. 2.You chose to have a bond, as did I. I won't tell the asshole down the street who beats his kid how to raise his children, though. He lacks a bond, that's his choice. We don't need to encourage anything...people make choices. At any rate, abortion doesn't rend that choice asunder to the extent you seem to think it does. 3/4. Of course they're going down. Other studies have shown improved diet and pre-natal care have reduced congenital problems. It has nothing to do with abortion. The numbers to which you refer trend to well before the legalization of abortion. So, statistically, you have PROVEN nothing. You have merely twisted some facts to suit your desires. 5. The level of commitment? Again, that is subjective. The logic is gapped. Work on it. Raising questions is meaningless without a basis to build on. 6) Late term abortions are allowed ONLY in very specific cases that are well defined and (according to pollsters - not that this means anything) the public supports. I, for one, have a problem with it. But in some cases, I have understood the mindset that produced them. What I was specifically referring to was a wholesale approval of late-term abortions. That, of course, doesn't exist. At any rate, that doesn't give people the right to shoot the doctors performing them. 7. Still unsupportable which makes 8. unfounded. I support democracy, within limits. As Winston Churchill said, it is the worst system ever devised, except for all the others. But in the event that 50% of the people are opposed, and 50% support a certain right or activity(or even 75/25)...it is best to opt (in a democracy) for the situation that BEST allows all people access to the rights they desire. In the case of abortion, it IS 50/50. So why should 50% of the people force their will on the other 50%?