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 (20722)	6/28/2005 2:26:21 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 28931

oh

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20722)	6/28/2005 2:37:37 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

btw, did you declare some non-glib criteria. A cut umbilical cord was yours, wasn't it?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20722)	6/29/2005 6:16:53 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

"Glib statements like "Life begins at Conception" are proven false by the abundant exceptions. SO TRUE! But not only that...but fetuses with no heads apparently have inalienable rights because they HAVE human DNA! But a golden retriever WITH A HEAD AND A BRAIN has NO rights! Religious pertinence or non religious? Must ask a priest!

To: TigerPaw who wrote (20722)	6/29/2005 10:39:16 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

"...are many variations on conception, or cloning, or twinning and how many distinct entities result." I am happy that you provided the headless twin anomaly for us to consider. It helps us to consider the question of being human. When does being qualify as a human being and at what point or points is that being entitled to be considered part of human society. As cus has stated we can pick arbitrary points and support them with laws. Which is essentially what we have done as a society. The question we are exploring now is whether or not that is the only or best way to do things.