Your post completely misconstrued my point: Fetuses can not own
property.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
------------------
This is why I must reject to cave to the desire of individuals
who
wish to close debate down to a scale they deem managable and
benificial to there goals rather than benificial to impartiality.
Social security, titles, etc are part of legal rights dirived
from
the state. I reject the idea that LIFE is protected only by legal
rights, making it little more than a privledge. Terry is very
ademant at how he defines a person, I am very ademant as to what
I
describe as the human right to life. This is not given by the
state
by an inate inalienable right.
Legal rights may require the devices of the state such as a
social
security number to label and track us for life. Human rights are
not
dependant on such things.
hu.man n.
1)A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H.
sapiens.
2)A person.
right n.
1) Something that is due to a person
2) Something, especially humane treatment, claimed to be due to
animals by moral principle.
life n.
1)The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms
from
dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such
as
metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or
adaptation to the environment originating from within the
organism.
2)The characteristic state or condition of a living organism.
Human Right to Life, do you believe in it or is your life the
property of the superstate, forget everything and ask yourself
that.
--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I would just like to humbly add my own to this masterful
exposure
> of anti-abortionism:
>
> If fetuses are persons, then I should be able to will my estate
> to my pregnant niece's. So that means fetuses will have to,
> immediately after conception, acquire things like names and
> genders and ss-numbers. Of course that also means that my other
> niece's fetus would have the right to contest my will. I can
see
> it now: both wombs in court, wired to ultrasound, with an
> "interpreter". Well whomever wins better not forget to pay the
> inheritance and property taxes or they might end up in
fetus-jail
> (and loose their freedom and their rights).
>
> -Mark
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
