On Monday 16 July 2007 22:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Interesting thought... > > That's because you are looking at it backwards. It seems you think the > government needs to explicitly grant freedoms such as abortion because > society feels it in their interest. But rather in a free country, the > individual would have a right to the abortion and the government would > have to exclude it by creating a law banning it > > but wrong according to US standards. > > The problem with this thinking is that our founders believed that we were > endowed by our creator (which is probably a problem for a lot of y'all) > with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Hi Larry! And killing a baby means that the baby can never exercise its 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms. That is enough reason right there to re-think the problem and liberalize the solution. Row v. Wade is not only obsolete, it is VERY obsolete. -- Regards, Pete http://www.pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
