[FoRK] thinking about responsibility
Mon Oct 24 11:41:38 PDT 2005
At 18:27 +0000 on 10/24/05, Russell Turpin wrote:
>Kevin Elliott <k-elliott at wiu.edu>:
>>We're not talking about a brain dead dog that will never move again. ..
>Yes, that is exactly what we're discussing.
>You're trying to change the analogy to one
>that is inappropriate, to a dog that has a
>brain that is largely functional. By doing so,
>you dodged the question I asked: what do
>you feel are the moral constraints regarding
>a dog that has NO functional brain.
Answering your specific question, it's appropriate to kill the dog.
I don't see how this applies to abortion. Either that embryo will
grow into a person, in which case we're dealing with something very
different than a brain dead dog. OR, it won't in which case we don't
even have to pay for an abortion- the body will take care of it on
>Consider the early embryos in a dog you
>want to neuter, if the other example doesn't
>work for you.
I'll also mention that I consider the moral obligation to a potential
human to be MUCH stronger than my obligation to my pets. I castrated
my dog at the earliest possible moment. I didn't need any little
mongrels running around my house. My analogy to dogs is about the
appropriate behavior toward the things we're responsible for, but
does not necessarily reflect my view on proper animal husbandry.
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