[FoRK] What Is Human? Ugh...
deafbox at hotmail.com
Tue Mar 2 19:11:30 PST 2004
>1) failing to stop a natural process that results in death
>is not in the same category as trying to prevent the deliberate actions of
>third parties that result in death. ..
I never said it was. But we do all sorts of things to
prevent natural processes that result in death. Except
in this case, which -- given the "pro-life" assumption --
cause more human death than all others combined.
Yet no pro-lifer stirs a finger against it.
>2) Deciding which medical technology/advances to support is a question of
>economics and best outcome, not simply morality. ..
There's nary a fatal disease where there isn't SOME
effort to curtail it, no matter how rare, no matter
that its victims would retain various permanent
deficiencies if their lives were saved, no matter how
unlikely the near-term result, no matter what.
Except in this case. Now why is that?
To anyone sensible, it's obvious why: we're talking
about a zygote with no nervous system, not a person.
But a "pro-lifer" can't accept the obvious.
Yet none of them lift a finger. Against -- what in
their view -- is the SINGLE LARGEST CAUSE OF
Again, I say, hypocrisy.
Find things fast with the new MSN Toolbar includes FREE pop-up blocking!
More information about the FoRK