[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> laws can define the killing of a dog as murder, and if the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> law survived court scrutiny it would be valid."   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>As I said.. a double standard.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Not at all.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> This entire argument boils down to the question of who has   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the primary rights when a woman is pregnant, the woman or   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the fetus/baby/whatever.  A choice must be made as it is an   
   >>>>>>>>>>> all or nothing situation with no possible compromise which   
   >>>>>>>>>>> satisfies both sides.  The pregnancy is terminated, or it is   
   >>>>>>>>>>> not.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Yep, and unless you're going to claim a baby has NO rights until   
   >>>>>>>>>>after   
   >>>>>>>>>>being   
   >>>>>>>>>>born.... then at some point the rights of the fetus to exist and   
   >>>>>>>>>>continue   
   >>>>>>>>>>exist supersede those of the mother.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Why should the rights of the potential individual exceed the   
   >>>>>>>>> rights of the existing individual?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Because their existence is no longer a matter of potential but of   
   >>>>>>>>physical   
   >>>>>>>>fact.. specifically the point where they could survive outside the   
   >>>>>>>>mother.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Fine.  Remove it and let someone else take care of it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Sorry, but you are responsible for your offspring. Many well   
   >>>>>>established   
   >>>>>>court rulings on that matter.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There are many ways to give up  a child for adoption.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>So that means they weren't aborted. Further until they ARE adopted or   
   >>>>otherwise legally removed from your custody, they are indeed legally   
   >>>>your   
   >>>>obligation to care for and protect. Your comment only validates what I   
   >>>>stated above, as it requires LEGAL action to absolve your responsibility   
   >>>>to   
   >>>>your child, and until then you are and remain responsible for that   
   >>>>child.   
   >>>>In   
   >>>>some cases your legal obligations may continue to exist even though you   
   >>>>don't   
   >>>>have custody or possession of the child in question.   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't argue those points.  However those are all financial   
   >>> obligations while the woman involved is risking her life and   
   >>> health up to the point where she isn't.   
   >>   
   >>Well, it's good to know that no worker deaths ever occur and that there   
   >>are   
   >>no issues with workplace safety or health issues.   
   >   
   > Irrelevant.  People drop dead walking down the street.   
      
   Yep, and if we was due to some killing them.. they're probably going to jail   
   for it.   
      
   > Few workers are required to work at a particular job and   
   > cannot quit.   
      
   I see, so as long as you're being paid to do it.. that makes murder for hire   
   legal?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)