SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Greg or e who wrote (81317)7/15/2009 1:33:24 PM
From: Solon1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 82486
 
"Living Human Beings begin at conception not at birth. To say otherwise is unscientific."

Human life far antecedes conception imo, but nothing in our argument changes if we set it at conception because nobody at least argues against that. It does you little good to blow up your face in a bluster and tighten your fists while holding your breath because repeating something that everyone on all sides of the abortion issue has complete agreement on is simply a waste of time and surely an embarrassment for you, n'est-ce pas??

But human persons begin at birth--not before. THAT IS THE SCIENTIFIC, PHILOSOPHICAL, SOCIAL, AND LEGAL FACT.

"Does the consciousness of the child change from one moment to the next"

Try to get this clear, ok?? A new-born child is NOT self conscious and there is profound debate on whether or not it ought to be considered a person at that stage of development. But our society has decided that ethically and legally it IS a person after birth--and not before--and I am in full accord with that position.

The issue of personhood is not strictly one of ends, interests, desires, sentience when we are addressing the issue of fetal life. We can certainly make laws regarding abortion and we do; and these protective laws do not require a designation of personhood on a zygote--no more than laws protecting animals from cruelty need to wait for animals to get human dna or sentience or anything else. But the principle of human rights rests on the idea of individual existence with personal interests and goals. Such commonalities CAN be shared voluntarily (as when a mother nurtures a zygote into a fetus into a child). BUT THEY CANNOT BE SHARED BY FORCE BECAUSE THAT RENEGES ON SOME INDIVIDUALS HUMAN RIGHTS. And we know the mother IS an individual and for society to defer her individuality to that of a zygote they would have to prove that the zygote had a more compelling claim to human rights than she did. Because only ONE of them can have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News