XPost: talk.politics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: talk.philosophy.humanism   
      
   "Daniel T."  wrote in message   
   news:daniel_t-25B46E.22233610122003@news05.east.earthlink.net...   
   > Don Swayser  wrote:   
   >   
   > > rnewland@austin.rr.com wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > In the law, the profits of ownership are divided in proportion to the   
   > > > contributions of the owners.   
   > > > Even though the genetic contributions are 50/50, the other efforts are   
   > > > certainly not. By this   
   > > > the woman should be very much in control of the "property".   
   > > >   
   > > "In the law" Human Beings, in this country, are not property.   
   >   
   > The best way to prove the above wrong is to go to a park and find a   
   > child willing to go home with you. Then see how much trouble you get   
   > into because you took someone else's property. The same thing doesn't   
   > happen if you find a girlfriend or even wife to go home with you,   
   > because she doesn't belong to anyone... Children are property.   
      
   They are property but not in all respects the same as non-human property.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)