I am simply recognizing a clear biological distinction. It seems
an important one, at least in biological terms, at least to me.
And I think biological traits are entirely relevant to the topic
of rights. In fact, they are responsible for accruing your
criteria for personhood.
[Terry and Tom, et al,
I'd like to say how much I appreciate participating in this
thread. I might often seem bullheaded, but what I am actually
doing is getting myself a very good education about a very
specific topic - the quality of which I could probably get
nowhere else (at least around 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.] }
--------------
Mark, so what; it's STILL 100% dependent on someone other than
itself
for life support (water, food and so on)
-Terry Liberty Parker
PERSONHOOD: Abortion & beyond
at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/48351
--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> Terry,
>
> I see this huge jump in independence as relevant to your
criteria
> by being the cause. The reduction in dependence is both
> qualitative and quantitative; even though babies are still
> dependant on people, they are no longer 100% dependent on one
> person.
>
> -Mark
>
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.
