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: TimF who wrote (78403)	10/27/2003 6:23:19 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

but none of those reasons would be consistent with libertarianism. Exactly. Can't be both.

To: TimF who wrote (78403)	10/27/2003 7:06:26 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I always wonder why the expression "killing a living human being" has such currency. Isn't 'living' redundant? I am suspicious that it's a slogan used to de-emphasize that the issue is not the definition of 'living,' but the definition of 'human being.' We've been over it many times, though. When does a blueprint become a house, when does an egg become a chicken, when does a fertilized ovum become a human being? I understand that people have a reason (or more than one, but a particular one is most prevalent) for pretending such things as that eggs are chickens and calling them "living chicken beings." "Sentient" was a word that was used in discussions on feelies. On impulse, I put Definitions of "human being" into google. It turned up an interesting page. rosmini-in-english.org It's not very polite of me to post at all right now, really, because for the time being I don't have time to engage in discussion, and it doesn't seem quite right to browse, and then post, and then be unresponsive to a reply. My apologies for doing that recently.