human zygotes and claiming that such use is sustained by
scientific/biologic consensus, I'm challenging you to provide readily
verifiable supporting source citations.
Though you have made clear that you don't automatically equate your
use of the term to also mean 'person' there is a substantial
consensus which does make such equation.
Main Entry: zy·gote
Pronunciation: 'zI-"gOt
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek zygOtos yoked, from zygoun to join -- more at ZYGOMA
: a cell formed by the union of two gametes; broadly : the developing
individual produced from such a cell
- zy·got·ic /zI-'gä-tik/ adjective
at http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=zygote
-Terry Liberty Parker
PERSONHOOD: Abortion & beyond
at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/48351
--- In [email protected], "Thomas L. Knapp"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Quoth Paul Ireland:
>
> > There is no fetus fairy argument. A zygote isn't a human being.
A
> > fetus isn't a human being. At the moment of birth it BECOMES a
human
> > being.
>
> Science and empirical observation say you're wrong. If you think you
> are right ... PROVE IT.
>
> > No "magic" is needed to describe why.
>
> Good. Since no magic is needed to describe why, feel free to do so.
>
> > NOTHING within the body
> > of a person has any rights.
>
> 1) Person A (age 40, Ph.D. in astrophysics) was morbidly obese, but
> recently had a surgery which left him weighing 100 pounds less, but
> with an unsightly abdominal skin flap.
>
> 2) Person B is a midget (age 25, M.A. in history), two feet four
> inches in height and weighing 40 pounds.
>
> 3) Person C kidnaps and knocks out Person A and Person B, makes an
> incision in Person A's abdominal flap, stuffs Person B and an oxygen
> tank inside, and sews Person A back up.
>
> Do Person B's rights disappear? If so, why?
>
> > At the moment of birth, the biological parasite (aka fetus) is
removed
> > from the body of its host and it is endowed with human rights
> > including self-ownership, etc.
>
> How and why?
>
> > No magic is needed, yet all the difference in the world exists.
In a
> > matter of 1 second it goes from no human rights to full human
rights.
>
> How and why?
>
> > The completely untenable position that a zygote is a human being
is
> > illogical and makes those who claim such seem unreasonable.
>
> Except, of course, to anyone who has ever taken Biology 101 or
cracked
> the textbook.
>
> > I've presented a logical, reasonable, intelligent, and non-
insulting
> > response to explain why it is that birth is when we obtain
rights, and
> > not a second before.
>
> You've offered an assertion -- without so much as one iota of
evidence
> to support that assertion -- that nothing inside anyone else's body
> has rights.
>
> You've offered an assertion -- again, without so much as one iota of
> evidence to support that assertion -- that rights are obtained at
> birth (not a second before, and implicitly not a second after).
>
> Two assertions aren't an "explanation." They're just two assertions.
>
> > You either believe in sole dominion over our body and the
organisms
> > within it, or you don't.
>
> In other words, "Paul Ireland said it, Paul Ireland believes it,
that
> settles it."
>
> Tom Knapp
>
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.
