Sharks in the Septic Tank Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (79193)	11/27/2003 11:45:10 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) of 82486

"Potential reasonably looked at does not have infinite regress in this context" There is nothing remarkable about the context. I am simply making the distinction between capacity and potential. Everything is potentially a human, and every human is potentially (and inevitably) a corpse or non-human. Potentiality per se offers no basis for meaningful qualification in regards to abortion. All sperm have the potential to fertilize the egg and thus create a human life. In fact, without sperm there is no potential for a fertilized egg leading to a human. Sperm is very much a necessary stepping stone to human actuality. What I am trying to get at is this: There appears to be a hidden assumption in your use of "potentiality" that there is something meaningful about human cells per se which is different than say the cells of a sperm. So are the cells of a fetus different than the cells of a zygote? Is it your belief that human DNA is sacred? Is a human egg important because it is sacred? That would be an argument which would be allowable even if impossible to substantiate. "They used to have human though and may have it again but its not certain that they will" Yes, we are both well aware that when there is no longer any hope of human persons actualizing a capacity previously enjoyed (to wit: the capacity to experience sense and thought in a meaningful way), then the essential capacity which gave them humanity is lost...and tough decisions need to be made. I don't think you and I disagree on that score... "I think it should be considered deserving of legal protection. Definitely a fetus at a later stage of development should (abortions are not performed on fertilized eggs)." On what basis should it have legal protection? Protection from whom? From what? What claim could society possibly have on a woman's zygote? If society has a claim on a fetus then it obviously has a claim on the precursor to the fetus (if we are to try to attach some meaning to your "potentiality" argument--which I am doing only for argument's sake and to show how capricious it is). So on what basis does society lay a claim on your wife's zygoye or on your sperm? "abortions are not performed on fertilized eggs." Sorry...abortions happen spontaneously on fertilized eggs millions of times a day, and they are induced by "morning after" pills on fertilized eggs to prevent their attachment to the lining or to remove them from the lining. The "morning after" pill often acts as a contraceptive. It also often acts as an abortion agent.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next