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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20459)	6/16/2005 1:01:07 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

”The real question is how humans fit into the continuous chain of life on earth that sustains the whole information tree that is life.” This is a real good question. If it were this simple, we would also have a simple solution. Live by eating and being eaten from food and shelter that exists in the naturally occurring biomes of the earth. To keep such a natural balance we should refrain from technical developments that provide an accommodation for extra human beings. Since naturally occurring enemies to human beings are not sufficient to control our balance in the continuous tree of life chain, of which you speak, would you suggest we begin forming marauding hordes to kill off the excess? <sarcasm>

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20459)	6/16/2005 1:03:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

”The real question is how humans fit into the continuous chain of life on earth that sustains the whole information tree that is life.” We fit as a rational, personal, and moral creature with a conscience that regards our well being as much as it does the well being of others. A unique niche that comes with a great deal of responsibility. And thank God we are able to accept our struggle and to use our natural adaptive gifts of innovation to make it (such as IT is) work from one generation to another. Can you imagine what people of the middle ages would have said if we told them to get ready for 7 billion people. Hint: You and I probably wouldn't be here. Abort is another word for give-up. I prefer stand-up to give-up.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20459)	6/16/2005 1:34:38 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"There are people who are biologically distinct from each other and there are some who are not. Think both twins and clones... While I am sure this seems very important to you, but it too is largely irrelevant ..." So, it matters not whether a given collection of cells is a genetically distinct human being - it's OK to kill those "cells" either way? Is it ever wrong, in your mind, to kill a genetically distinct human being (or an identical twin or clone, for that matter)? How do you decide where to draw the line? "The real question is why you think all life on earth should be put at risk for such an abstract question." How is "all life on Earth ... at risk" over the question of what is or isn't a human being?