Your presence here is fine. There is another, moderated thread now. In any case, before you go, would you please justify your statement, "Your post accuses me of all sorts of duplicities"?
I was surprised to read that, and apologize for giving you that impression of personal hostility. Actually, I was sure I had indicated that I didn't know the degree to which you were consciously aware of the strategy of the "pro-life" movement.
I did re-read, and I think if you do so, you'll see that I express my view that the "pro-lifers" use fuzzy language as a strategy to force their metaphysics on those who don't share it.
I had no idea of why you use the term "a human" to describe "a potential human." That's why I said, "perhaps unconsciously"!
I now believe it WAS unconscious, because i see that you have changed your view from
~the fertilized ovum is "a human"
to
~the fertilized ovum is "human life."
I have no problem with that. The ovum is "human life" before it's fertilized, too. So is the male's sperm. Don't you think the male ejaculate is human life rushing to replicate its DNA?
My point is that the metaphysicians blur the distinction between "human life," and "a human being," or "a person," and that this is a blurring used to justify using the machinery of the state to force others to live by their religious, or metaphysical, precepts.
I wished that you would engage that distinction specifically. |
