[FoRK] What Is Human? Ugh...
Gregory Alan Bolcer
gbolcer at endeavors.com
Fri Mar 5 06:07:28 PST 2004
Yes Russell, you may have the job checking all the discarded
tampons to check for fertilized eggs.
There, does that solve it?
From: fork-bounces at xent.com on behalf of Russell Turpin
Sent: Thu 3/4/2004 7:00 PM
To: fork at xent.com
Subject: RE: [FoRK] What Is Human? Ugh...
Gregory Alan Bolcer:
>There's two ways an egg gets fertilized. Intentional and unintentional.
>So, either there's a lot of couples out there trying to make babies where
>the egg didn't implant or a lot of irresponsible people not using birth
There is a lot of both. In essence, for all the cases
where pregnancy detectably presents, you can
extrapolate a fertilized egg that failed to implant.
>>It is the "pro-lifers" who claim this [that zygotes are people]. I merely
>>point out that they don't act in a manner consistent with that. My
>>argument is that this makes them hypocrites. Note that there is no
>>reductio ad absurdum involved in this argument.
>So, you are saying because they can discriminate
>between different stages including when something is detectable and private
>and you cant', YOU see them as hypocrites.
No, I'm not. Those issues simply don't enter into
this the way you think. Prolifers are adamant --
BY THEIR OWN PRECEPTS -- that every zygote
they produce IS a person, deserving all the
protection and nourishment and respect that
they grant every other member of their family.
I'm merely pointing out that they don't act
according to their own precepts. If you can
explain how privacy concerns would cause a
pro-lifer to treat as inconsequential something
that -- BY THEIR OWN PRECEPTS -- they
should view as one of their own children,
please do so.
For what I hope is the last time, this isn't about
how I view zygotes or how you view zygotes.
It isn't about legal issues. I don't know how to
be much more clear than that.
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK