[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted:06:16:15 04/03/01 Tue In reply to:
Zisel ben
's message, "Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged" on 14:23:29 04/02/01 Mon
----I was making the point that, Yes, the child is biologicaly a part of BOTH the mother and father so that YES both should be equally responsible for it, not just the mother because of her 9 month physical attachment.
Is that more clear?----
No, that is not more clear. It is exactly what you said before, and it is dead wrong.
You say:
----the child is biologicaly a part of BOTH the mother and father----
This is false. The truth is, the mother and the father are biologically part of the child. The opposite of what you said.
Then you write:
----And Just because the woman is biologicaly connected to the physical being of that baby for 9 months does not mean that the child is ONLY a part of "her".
Again, see how I had written "DOES NOT MEAN...." did you miss that or something?----
You contradict yourself in this sentence. Do you even realize that? You write the contradiction the second time in all caps even:
----"DOES NOT MEAN...."----
Then ask me:
----did you miss that or something?----
Re: Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged