[FoRK] thinking about responsibility
Mon Oct 24 11:17:15 PDT 2005
At 17:56 +0000 on 10/24/05, Russell Turpin wrote:
>>>Whether or not one wants to make arguments
>>>about later abortions, an embryo that hasn't yet
>>>developed a functioning brain has zero claim on
>>>the woman who is pregnant.
>Kevin Elliott <k-elliott at wiu.edu>:
>>How do you figure that? Her choices put it there. No different
>>than the responsibility an owner has to his dog. .. All of them are
>>his "right". .. Not all of them are moral. ..
>OK, tell me what you think the moral constraints
>are respecting a dog that doesn't have a functioning
>brain. The concrete examples might be a dog that
>had a functioning brain but suffered some disease
>that left it brain dead, or a puppy born anencephalic,
>or the early embryos of a pregnant dog.
Exactly the same- again, NONE of those things were a surprise. You
didn't buy the dog and then learn "oops, it doesn't have a brain".
Is it any LESS evil to beat a dog because it's retarded? Moreover,
to continue your analogy, the dogs going to get better. We're not
talking about a brain dead dog that will never move again. We're
talking about an injured dog who needs time to heal. AND we're
talking about an injured dog that you bought that way!
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in mud.
After a while, you realize the pig is enjoying it.
Kevin Elliott <mailto:kelliott at mac.com>
AIM/iChatAV: kelliott at mac.com (video chat available)
More information about the FoRK