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: Oeconomicus who wrote (20723)	6/28/2005 2:29:47 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"BTW, is that one-half of zero or negative one-half wits?" We can settle this right here and now. Do these entities have inalienable rights or not? If so then we can flush that whole line of reasoning. Wits, half-wits, or portions their of = NA

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (20723)	6/28/2005 2:35:12 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

No, as with Archeopteryx, neither the chicken nor the egg were an a priori condition of the other. Like wise perhaps it isn't something of the flesh or the conditions of the environment that qualifies one as human. Of course if we go down that path greg's basis for suggesting that being human is equal to material descriptors alone goes out the window ... unless someone else has a suggestion. Best regards, The turnip