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: dave rose who wrote (17338)	6/25/2001 12:55:25 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Are they killers if they don't think a fetus is a person? Were slave owners killers if they whipped to death disobedient slaves who they didn't think were persons? Should the definition of what is a person be up to the individual, or up to society as a whole?

To: dave rose who wrote (17338)	6/25/2001 1:42:37 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If the fetus is a person.... Well that is the the question as you say. The fetus isn't really like other people, is it? It can't go to Starbucks on it's own and order a latte. It can't drive. It can't even whine or cry. It's a very strange sort of person. Plus it sucks the life out of somebody else. Which is fine if that somebody wants to be a life support system for a little protohuman, but is not fine, imo, if the somebody does not wish to be a host. Now one could argue that SHE, for it is always a SHE since the HE whose sperm was 1/2 responsible doesn't have to play host, shouldn't have had any sex if she didn't want a little human in 9 mos. But that seems a bit harsh to me- sexuality being what it is, and people being what they are. Of course if you want to be Victorian (and have men be hypocrites and women be exploited) I suppose that's that. But I'm a little more modern. And I wonder, is a fetus a person when it is still a one cell union of sperm and egg? And thus is using contraceptive devices that prohibit this "person" from implanting, also "killing."? And is it wrong to do such killing? And if it is, why is it? Why is human life to be guarded at all cost? Except for criminals and wars. We know people like that kind of killing, so we'll ignore that. Now taking up the fetal question, as it were, what makes the fetus a person? Is it a person because it can, if unmolested, develop into a person? Or are we to give personhood to something less sentient, and less complex, than a dog, simply because it contains human DNA (unless you like dogs more than people- and I can certainly see that position so I won't argue with you if you feel that way. I can only apologize for insulting dogs by implying that people were somehow "more complex.") Of course if you believe it's a person it's a person. But if you don't it isn't. Ce la vie. Not that most people at the extremes get that.