the POTENTIAL for human life, but does not have it. Separate DNA does
not amount to human life. A fetus is not a whole human being. A
whole human being is a fully sentient person and a fetus is not. We
can use Terry's definition of person if you choose.
--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> A sperm cell is not human life but it has the potential to be, a
> human egg cell is not human life but it has the potential to be so.
> A human fetus is not a piece of one human whole such as your arm, it
> is itself a human whole. You would be wiser to cop out and follow
> Terry's lead of personhood, as a human fetus is human. If you sever
> your arm its self mutilation, suggesting problems that I am not
> trained to deal with.
>
> --- In [email protected], "Paul" <ptireland@> wrote:
> >
> > My arm is a human arm. It has human DNA, and it's alive. If I
> sever
> > my arm, have I murdered someone? Human life is different from any
> > other. Human life belongs to people (aka persons).
> >
> > Here are a list of things that do NOT qualify as HUMAN life.
> >
> > A beating heart
> > A cerebral cortex
> > A nervous system
> > Human DNA
> > Reflexive Actions or response to painful stimuli
> > Head, Torso, Hands, Feet, Fingers, Toes, Eyes, Ears, Nose, or Mouth
> > The shape of a human being
> >
> > An acorn is not an oak tree but it has the POTENTIAL to be one.
> Dough
> > is not bread, but it has the POTENTIAL to be. A fetus is not a
> human
> > being but it has the POTENTIAL to be one.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On what basis do you feel it apropriate to twist, contort and
> > > outright lie about my statements Terry? I attribute HUMANESS to
> the
> > > fetus Terry. The response was to Paul, who does not merely argue
> > > that a fetus does not fit a definition of personhood. Paul
> outright
> > > claims that a human fetus is not human despite the fact that it
> is
> > > indead a human fetus, not a baboon fetus, not an antelope fetus
> not
> > > anything like that. My post remains below yours to remind you
> that
> > > not once did I use the word Personhood in it.
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "Terry L Parker"
> <txliberty@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On what basis do you assert that the property of personhood be
> > > > attributed to a pre-born human individual?
> > > >
> > > > Please see what I wrote in this forum as
> > > > 'PERSONHOOD: Abortion & beyond'
> > > > at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/48100
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Terry Liberty Parker
> > > > http://profiles.yahoo.com/txliberty
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit"
> <uncoolrabbit@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > A much better statement of yourpoint of view than recently,
> but
> > > > > you "obviously are trying to" strip the human atrribute from
> a
> > > > human
> > > > > organism, just as the slaver or the fascist before you. :)
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
SPONSORED LINKS
| Libertarian | English language | Political parties |
| Online dictionary | American politics |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
