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: TheStockStalker who wrote (21820)	7/26/2005 10:49:37 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Very good post. You stated: "If I prick the fetus with a needle when it is six months old does it hurt the baby?" That seems to argue for a developmental definition of value. But the truth is that value does not start at 6 months. My daughter just came into 8 little golden retrievers from Chase and Chicklet. They are just incredible. But if they were born in the woods, some or all of them would be dead in order that other (incredible) life goes on. It is true that unborn fetuses may sometimes be kept alive if the mother dies. But that is not the issue. The issue is whether or not society can FORCE the prospective mother to be a slave to her fetus against her will? In most cases she wants her Fetus. We are discussing those instances when she does not. A fetus is not a legal human person. It cannot rely on "natural law" anymore than my sperm can rely on it. Human DNA at an unconscious level is no more touching than puppy DNA. Surely there are religious "arguments"; but superstition is not a sound basis for society. You don't "care" about the millions of spontaneous abortions that occur each day around the world...and neither do I. And when it comes to chosen abortions I realize that it is none of my concern. I have some sympathy for the argument that a fetus (at some point) might feel pain. The mother certainly feels pain and it is up to her if she wishes to host a fertilised egg for 9 months. If a fetus has rights then so does an egg and so does my sperm and so does the zinc supplement that helped to make my sperm. Let me ask you something? Do you remark a difference between a fetus and an egg? I ask because you made a point about the issue of feeling pain...

To: TheStockStalker who wrote (21820)	7/27/2005 10:26:40 AM
From: Solon	Respond to of 28931

It is true that unborn fetuses may sometimes be kept alive if the mother dies. But that is not the issue. The issue is whether or not society can FORCE the prospective mother to be a slave to her fetus against her will? In most cases she wants her Fetus. We are discussing those instances when she does not. A fetus is not a legal human person. It cannot rely on "natural law" anymore than my sperm can rely on it. Human DNA at an unconscious level is no more touching than puppy DNA. Surely there are religious "arguments"; but superstition is not a sound basis for society. You don't "care" about the millions of spontaneous abortions that occur each day around the world...and neither do I. And when it comes to chosen abortions I realize that it is none of my concern. I have some sympathy for the argument that a fetus (at some point) might feel pain. The mother certainly feels pain and it is up to her if she wishes to host a fertilised egg for 9 months. If a fetus has rights then so does an egg and so does my sperm and so does the zinc supplement that helped to make my sperm.

To: TheStockStalker who wrote (21820)	7/30/2005 3:00:18 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

There are many parts to that post, but just to address one. It seems to me that the largest part of being an individual is the ability to sense something individually. A human body is complex enough that there are parts of the body that can sense something independantly of other parts. This is why the doctor taps you on the knee with his rubber hammer. The leg has enough sensors to feel this and move by itself. If there is a gap of time before the leg moves it indicates that the leg did not notice, but that the brain picked up the signal via different pathways and sent a move signal, all of which takes noticable time. The point is that a leg is not a person. The ability to sense something individually is not sufficent to categorize that thing as a unique individual. I think the statement the ability to sense something individually is on the right track, but still does not adequetly convey the correct distinctions. TP