(Untitled)

Nov 07, 2006 10:51

I got another email from sensei ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

kum0r1_j3d1 November 7 2006, 19:15:39 UTC
i fail to understand why politicians have this fixation on not letting the abortion issue die. that's why they bring it up with regards to stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. neither process uses human fetuses(or foetuses? i think i've seen it spelled like that too). "blastocysts" are what the cells are derived from.

"You don't have the right to insult him. He's our president, damn it, respect the office, and what he believes"
George Bush isn't America. people are supposed to question their government. the current energy policy is a complete joke, and you can't lower taxes during a deficit, no matter how well the economy is doing. the senate also raised the country's debt ceiling a few months back, which doesn't bode well.

*interesting fact*: interpreting the Bible literally didn't come about until the Reformation (how much of America is Protestant?).

Reply

abortion, abortion mattatat November 8 2006, 06:00:49 UTC
Politicians have a "fixation" on abortion because the United States never got to have a political debate about abortion. It was not decided through our more democratic process but by the SCOTUS. There are advantages to Roe v. Wade deciding abortion the way it did, and it is reasonable to think they outweigh the cons. But it is undeniable that a con is the fact that, because it did not involve a "fair fight" and political resolution, Roe has meant a never-ending abortion debate.

An abortion related question, if you are wanting for metaphysical homework assignments:
Regarding the claim that a fetus is no "more human" than an eyeball, I'm curious what you think "human" is, why assigning that label confers special value, and how you think your understanding of the term is superior to the average pro-lifer's.

Reply

kum0r1_j3d1 November 8 2006, 19:12:56 UTC
well, in general "human" has at least two definitions.
1) biology (biologially homo sapien)
2) social (an active member of the community with regards to morality)

though human, that does not mean that a fetus is a person(a being with consciousness, reasoning, self-motivation, self-awareness and the ability to communicate).

Reply

person mattatat November 9 2006, 02:19:36 UTC
The "consciousness, reasoning, self motivation..." conception of personhood (and thus presumably sanctity of life, or lack thereof, in the abortion context) is fine. But that doesn't answer the question "where does that definition come from, and why is it better than one that says anything with human biology is a 'person'.

Further, if we assume that view of what makes a 'person' was given to us from on high or whatever, can the parents of a severely retarded kid kill it? Or for that matter, a regular baby? A baby isn't conscious, doesn't reason, and in fact just lays in a crib and poops.

And I don't think this question is a red herring.

Reply

Re: person kum0r1_j3d1 November 9 2006, 04:12:38 UTC
well, in addition to being able to communicate, the retarded child/regular baby has already been born, so it's a person regardless. but because it is a person, the parents have the option of putting the child up for adoption(something i'm sure we can agree is preferable to killing human beings).

the definition i used earlier is one derived from contemporary philosphy. in that sense, "person" is describing the psychological/moral properties of a person.

however, that's only using the field of philosophy, so the usage and definition will differ depending on what one uses as a framework.

Reply

Re: person mattatat November 9 2006, 14:08:09 UTC
You're a person when you're born? I thought we weren't attaching special magic meaning to something's simple biology (a blastocyst isn't a person). But now we're attaching special magic meaning to the fact that something took the ride down the birth canal? Round and round we go ( ... )

Reply

Re: abortion, abortion metal__gear_rex November 8 2006, 22:50:19 UTC
I should correct, not fetus, blastocyst. But for me, I mean...I hate babies, less of them is good. I don't even consider a lot of adults human by my personal definition, but thats because I'm a cynic and a jerk.

Reply

kum0r1_j3d1 November 8 2006, 23:13:33 UTC
"Babies are useless, they have hearts the size of ping-pong balls." ~ House

Reply


Leave a comment

Up