Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (7580)	3/6/2001 10:40:20 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 82486

I would if he asked me to. Are you asking because your wife does that for you, or because she won't? Edit- and I DO hope you'll say the same thing to this helpful little imp: To:X the Unknown who wrote (7379) From: twfowler Monday, Mar 5, 2001 5:45 PM View Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7582 Problem is you've bridged the tricky philosophical gap "if allowed to develop". If not allowed to develop it won't be a human being. Voila- not homicide. Cute though- trying to jump from living being to human being without any of us noticing. Your jumped from living to human is unsupported by the dictionary. I believe Neocon is saying (at least I would say this and it seems we have the same idea about this) is that an organism that is alive and that is human is a human being. The "allowed to develop" was dealing with the fact that if it is allowed to develop it would become a recognizeable infant (and then a child and so on), not that if would become a human if it is allowed to develop. It allready is a human, at a very early stage of development. Tim