If all we have to do is identify things that folks should not do which interfere with the rights of others to live their lives,
and then coerce them, I can jump on the bandwagon with you.
Our entire world economy runs less than optimum,
resulting not only in some ethereal complaint but
definite bottlenecks ahead-- which will most likely kill billions of humans, and wipe out a good part of the ecology. Why is this happening? Well, it sure is convenient to let things go as they may!

If you do not forsee this problem, I would like to know how you expect the world to support a burgeoning population of humans who are demanding ever more consumer comforts. Have you done the math on this? Do you have the information? I'm serious. Academia and research groups have published a lot of information. Try, for example, www.dieoff.org.

Your idea, if I understand it, is that folks less than three months after conception must have their rights protected by the force of police and courts. What kind of coercion should we do to take care of all the other problems?
I'm exploring this idea with you, but I remain skeptical that you have shown that sperms and eggs are less deserving of that "protection" than a fetus less than three months after conception...
if the woman carrying the fetus does not want to carry it to birth.
Mike

• Try this for example...when deciding who to coerce - carefuluniverse - August 9, 2002 - 08:25 UTC
• Political failure a factor - dolphin - August 10, 2002 - 20:10 UTC
  • I am not a stupid idiot - spazcon - August 10, 2002 - 22:15 UTC
  • strange trend - kantolfir2 - August 10, 2002 - 22:52 UTC