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 (21069)	7/8/2005 1:29:13 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

A fetus at any stage of development is not the same as a brain dead disease or accident victim, you dope.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (21069)	7/8/2005 7:14:32 PM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<<<Would lynching a black man be wrong if He was your property and it were legal to do it?>>> "No, but then the obvious question is why?" I am assuming from the rest of your answer that you actually meant to say "yes it would be wrong" If that's not the case then make that clear. "It is because he is self aware." Self awareness is not established until well after birth so it fails to meet even your own standard of chord cutting. By that (self awareness) criteria, it should be legal to kill any child for any reason and it would not be wrong. Would you be in favor of that? "Would turning off the respirator of a brain-dead person of any sex or color be wrong?" As it has been pointed out there is a great deal of difference between the a fetus which will (if left alone) naturally develop brain functions as it matures, and a brain dead person who has irreparably lost brain function. There is also a difference between not providing extraordinary life support measures and actively killing the person. Killing a person (even one who is brain dead) is still an act of murder. That's why Terry S. had to be allowed to starve to death slowly instead of putting a bullet (or a pair of scissors) in the back of her head. "they go to consciesness" What if you beat the black man into unconsciousness first? THEN it would be wrong?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (21069)	2/23/2006 12:15:38 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 28931

"It is because he is self aware." Self awareness in children is thought to be a product of communication with others. A child cries when experiencing distress. Mother determines that the cry represents hunger and feeds the child. Eventually the child internalizes that function of crying for a calculated result. The cry morphs into requests to have needs met and in later years into inquiry and motivated action. ... "Language is to the mind as light is to the eye." We depend entirely on communication from and with society to further distinguish and internalize the spectrum of our needs, interests, desires and attitudes until we are able to internalize more profound visions of our life's value and purposes. At such a time we might be viewed as independently self aware. Some folks, maybe most people, do not become lucid in their independent self awareness in their life time. If we never become able to distinguish our selves from base desire we remain in some proximity to our more primitive relatives. Example: An ape is separated from a banana by a fence though there is an entrance just a few meters away. The ape is unable to distance itself from the situation so that it may look at the options open to it. Instead, it remains salivating, totally focused on the object of its desire. Delay of gratification, more specifically the degree to which we are able to delay gratification, is directly correlated with our abilities to carry on vision and purpose that transcends the present circumstance.