I don't comprehend why you are explaining the nature of rights,
when we are discussing abortion and "human" vs "person".
Regarding "person", Merriam Webster grants synonymy with "human"
in def # 1. But def # 6 says: "one (as a human being, a
partnership, or a corporation) that is recognized by law as the
subject of rights and duties."
Since this discussion is about abortion (and immigration?) and
what life-stage qualifies for full rights, I assume #6 is more
appropriate here.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
----------
I disagree. Rights are NOT given to us by the state or by
political
aperatus Mark. Rights, are those things that are believed to be
ours
with out strings attached. Human seems far more apropriate to me
for
discussing rights Mark. Thats why they say "Human rights" Mark.
--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> For our purposes, "human" seems more scientific and "person"
more
> political. I believe the latter is more accommodating for
> discussing rights.
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
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.
