Why would I waste my time on a website based on a false premise, and
which violates the most sacred of libertarian principles .... sole
dominion over our own body and the contents within.


--- In [email protected], "David Macko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Apparently you still have not had enough time to completely
> read all of the information at www.l4l.org.
>
> For life and liberty,
> David Macko
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 9:48 AM
> Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Badnarik on Immigration
>
>
> >A zygote is not a human being.  It does not posess human life.  it has
> > 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" <uncoolrabbit@>
> > 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



YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to