Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Dubya ain't the only one getting his instructions fro...

[MDixon6569]

In a message dated 10/26/06 5:51:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Based upon my understanding of the Buddhist concept that > life begins at conception it is complete with spirit.You > would have to ask them why they believe that. If it is, > why should they not have the most fundamental right of > all innocence, life? Who gets to decide when life starts > and when it needs to end? That is a very dangerous > position to let anybody have. Better to err on the side > of caution than set a precedent that can be arbitrarily > moved about. Two questions: Who is endangered by taking this position, and in what way? And what exactly do you mean by "err on the side of caution"? What exactly would that involve? I'm not sure I understand your first question. To err on the side of caution means if one doesn't know at what point the fetus is a human being and not a lump of tissue why would you risk making the mistake of taking it's life. What man/politician gets to decide when its ok to deliberately destroy innocent life. Can you imagine sometime in the future when health care dollars are too short and some politicians come up with the idea that maybe Healthcare benefits need to be withheld from certain age brackets so the rest can have  better care? Or the only procedure you are allowed is euthanasia? __._,_.___ To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___