 | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —John Neal
|
| | | (...) Nice term "non-sentient tissue structure". Merely because the fetus has yet to develop sentiency doesn't mean that it won't-- aborting it robs it of its right to do so. I think timing is irrelevant. I think that's why IUDs were such a bad (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Not to mention accurate. (...) So non-sentient tissue has rights, too? Do these rights supercede the rights of the sentient mother? Why? On what grounds? (...) Timing is the essence of the matter. (...) Nonsense. You are stating outright that (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —James Simpson
|
| | | | | | (...) Your term may indeed be accurate, but I think that it does not do full justice to the inherent and latent qualities of the tissue structure. When confronting the abortion issue from either angle, the issue of potential *cannot* be avoided. My (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —John DiRienzo
|
| | | | | | Thanks James "James Simpson" <jsimpson@rice.edu> wrote in message news:G3tuoG.CBD@lugnet.com... (...) woman (...) justice (...) confronting (...) intelligence (...) has (...) emergence (...) a (...) base (...) emerges (...) womb (...) matter (...) (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —Frank Filz
|
| | | | (...) I know Larry has called for sitting out this one, but I've got an interesting comment here... One does have to be a bit carefull about protecting the "potential" of human life. I read a short story once which took this idea to an extreme. In (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Yes, this can get a little crazy. When I say potential, I mean the potential of an *already* fertilized egg which has a specific genetic code in place. I think I can safely argue the potentiality of a fertilized egg without having to consider (...) (24 years ago, 10-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
