nacmacfeegle 0 #76 July 30, 2004 Good discussion guys (and gals)."Killing people is wrong to us because we are people, and we are sentient. It's wrong to me, too." This gives me a whole new moral dilemma to consider. How can someone be for the death penalty and yet be opposed to stem cell research/abortion? Conversely, and as an example, I am against the death penalty, but sort of support abortion (I'm for the individual mother to be allowed to make the choice, with suitable guidance and support) and stem cell harvesting. Hmmmm......-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #77 July 30, 2004 I'll play - Why is a convicted murderer's life more important than an unborn child's? I'm of mixed mind on the abortion issue, as such I don't support or condemn it but accept it as is.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #78 July 30, 2004 "Why is a convicted murderer's life more important than an unborn child's?" I don't really know, the question is more inquisitive than rhetorical in its purpose. Just for a change I'm actually looking for answers as opposed to just being my usual irritating self. BTW where do you stand on the death penalty?-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,153 #79 July 30, 2004 QuoteQuote You miss the point too. Legislation proposed or enacted because it is in line with Bush/Ashcroft's religious beliefs IS forcing their morality on the people. Same sex marriage amendment Stem cell research ban ... I'm not missing your point, I'm disagreeing with it. Kettle, meet pot: given your examples and turning them around, the Massachusetts and California gay marriage laws, or the defeat of the gay marriage amendment, are "forcing their morality on the people" equally as much. Absolute nonsense. No-one is forced into a gay marriage against their will in MA or CA, and no-one is forced to perform stem cell research against their will.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #80 July 30, 2004 I'm for the death penalty. I think that currently there's too much concern over the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. Hanging, the electric chair, or lethal injection is cruel/inhumane? What was nice or humane about what they did to their victim(s)? I think that once a murderer has been convicted, they should have ONE (1) appeal, said appeal to be carried out within, say...3 years. If that appeal is denied, sentence should be carried out immediately. Delete everything in the above paragraph EXCEPT the last half of the last sentence for a convicted mass murderer.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #81 July 30, 2004 Well, at lest there appears to be anelement of consistency in your thoughts. Its not my intention to address the rights or wrongs of the death penalty. We'll never draw that one to a close. I'm more interested in addressing the apparent inconsistency between say, upholding the death penalty, whilst condemning stem cell research and abortion, or vice versa. This is an inconsistency that I currently share with Dubbya, and that, to me is alarming!-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,153 #82 July 30, 2004 QuoteI'm for the death penalty. I think that currently there's too much concern over the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. Hanging, the electric chair, or lethal injection is cruel/inhumane? What was nice or humane about what they did to their victim(s)? I think that once a murderer has been convicted, they should have ONE (1) appeal, said appeal to be carried out within, say...3 years. If that appeal is denied, sentence should be carried out immediately. Delete everything in the above paragraph EXCEPT the last half of the last sentence for a convicted mass murderer. There have been a number of recent cases where a convicted murderer has been exonerated after 10+ years on death row and several appeals. Usually it has involved police and/or prosecutor misconduct and faked evidence. So what would you tell the families if you had hanged these convicted murderers after 1 appeal and three years? "Tough luck"?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #83 July 30, 2004 Please define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. Please notice I did NOT say the current system was perfect.... and the police/prosecutors/whoever involved in those cases where police/prosecutor malfeasance have been proven should be serving time for it. My biggest gripes with the current justice system: 1. Officiating from the bench - historical evidence shows that jurors were responsible not only for determining the guilt/innocence of the accused, but the law surrounding the case as well. No, I don't have linkage - google "jury nullification" and you'll find plenty of information about it. 2. This one I touched on earlier - the advancement of the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. This I lay squarely at the feet of defense attorneys and the media. 3. Too many people in jail for trivial infractions of the law and not enough "hard time" for violent felons. Where is the punishment in satellite tv, weight rooms, full library facilities and the like? I'm sorry, but I believe in "hard time" - they should be paying back their debt to society, not lounging back on my dime. Reference the recent uproar about the (Arizona, I believe) sheriff that has the inmates wearing pink jumpsuits and staying in tents due to overcrowding. "It's cruel - it's inhumane" BULLSHIT. Jail time SHOULD be hard time - other wise what use does it have as punishment? Might as well just ankle tag all the murderers, rapists and drug dealers and put them on house arrest. Sorry about the thread hijack... we now return to the discussion of religion and it's impact upon the morality of the nation.....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #84 July 30, 2004 Quoteno. lots of things have life. that isn’t what we are talking about. all life is not human. i can provide a clear definition (based on observable scientific fact) for when a fetus is human vs has the potential to become human. Ok…when is it? I’d like to see exactly when it is scientifically proven when the fetus becomes human. I believe if we all knew that conclusively, there would be no reason for this debate. Quoteyou take 'life' every day for the needs of your own. Unless of course you believe you survive on inorganic material Of course I don’t believe we survive on inorganic material. I never said that and you are now trying to put words in my mouth. We’re talking about human life here. Quoteso you can stop trying to build your strawman Why must you rely on insults to support your arguments? Quoteas to late term abortions? if the fetus is capable of surviving on its own without heroic medical attention (and remember science not religion is responsible for the expansion of when a fetus is viable and for the extension of human life at the opposite end of the envelop as well) then it is an independent member of its species and should be given the full rights and protections of one. Before then, it’s continued existence, and it’s potential to become human is totally dependent on the host (mother) who, as an existing independent member of the species, has rights a fetus does not. A woman is in her 24th week of pregnancy and she experiences an abruption (placenta separates from the uterus). The fetus has the potential lung development at that point to have a good chance at surviving on its own after delivery. Of course, in this instance, a natural delivery is not going to happen and the baby is going to die unless heroic medical attention is given (cesarean section). This all has to happen in a matter of minutes or the mother will bleed to death internally and the baby will suffer brain damage. However, even in this case, the 24 week old baby will be sent to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and will remain there a long time. It will be given extended care until it has time to develop and grow enough. Is that fetus, before it is taken out, or the baby, in the NICU, considered human by your criteria? Would it be acceptable for the doctor to abort this baby as it is taken out at the mother’s request? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #85 July 30, 2004 QuoteSo are you now saying that keeping embryos frozen is morally better than the embryos being removed from that artificial state and dying? Are you opposed to passive euthenasia (taking someone off life support)? I know you completely disagree with me on this but…yes. I don’t think they should have been put in that state in the first place unless they were in fact going to be used (put inside a host and allowed to develop). I’m going to stick to the topic and not get into passive euthanasia. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,153 #86 July 30, 2004 Google death penalty illinois So what would you tell the families of people improperly executed under your system?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #87 July 30, 2004 QuoteAs someone said sometime before, "I like feta cheese. It tastes good on gyros." Time to eat, I'm starving, gotta go! Later... That would've been me! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nacmacfeegle 0 #88 July 30, 2004 Y'see this just another example of the fundamental difference between you and I.... I prefer my feta to be served with a nice wee salad, and a light olive oil dressing.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pajarito 0 #89 July 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAs someone said sometime before, "I like feta cheese. It tastes good on gyros." Time to eat, I'm starving, gotta go! Later... That would've been me! Thought that sounded like a drunken monkey! I can dig it! Sometimes, it's very appropriate, fitting, and useful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdweller 0 #90 July 30, 2004 Some non religious people, I dare say, also believe that life begins prior to the time defined by Zenister and might also believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Find one. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I scientifically rationalize that human life starts when the genetic material of a human female mixes with the genetic material of a human male to form a distinct new human. However I do not believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. In fact not using these existing stem cells seems to me anyway to be a waste.------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #91 July 30, 2004 QuotePlease define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. QuotePlease notice I did NOT say the current system was perfect.... and the police/prosecutors/whoever involved in those cases where police/prosecutor malfeasance have been proven should be serving time for it. By your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? QuoteThis one I touched on earlier - the advancement of the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. This I lay squarely at the feet of defense attorneys and the media. The victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. QuoteToo many people in jail for trivial infractions of the law and not enough "hard time" for violent felons. Where is the punishment in satellite tv, weight rooms, full library facilities and the like? I'm sorry, but I believe in "hard time" - they should be paying back their debt to society, not lounging back on my dime. Then repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdweller 0 #92 July 30, 2004 Please define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Thats as far as I had to read before the word "DITTO" came to mind------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #93 July 30, 2004 Quote What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. What's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? Mine's zero... and equally as attainable as YOUR zero. QuoteBy your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? It wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves... murder two, maybe? Don't know...does murder two carry the death penalty, and does the circumstance merit it? QuoteThe victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. Agreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? QuoteThen repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Agreed, on repealing ALL the "war on this" "war on that" laws... they're nothing but feel-good window dressing for the most part that do absolutely nothing about the root cause of the problems.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #94 July 30, 2004 QuoteWhat's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? As many as possible without risking the execution of the innocent. And there's a simple solution to that without increasing the risk of actual criminals being released by mistake. Life in prison, no parole. That way your criminal is kept away from society, and my innocent person has an opportunity for redemption if new evidence turns up. If you kill them, that opportunity is lost forever. And you can always rearrest someone released by mistake. You cant' unkill someone. QuoteIt wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves Murder for hire is first degree. QuoteAgreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? Executing someone doesn't make the victim any more safe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #95 July 30, 2004 first. pointing out the use of fallacy (the 'strawman' a very commonly used fallacy on this board) is not a insult. Whenever anyone uses blatantly invalid arguments or fallacies it is important to point them out to avoid clouding the discussion. [I](what you said I posted vs what was actually posted)[/I] Quoteas to late term abortions? if the fetus is capable of surviving on its own without heroic medical attention (and remember science not religion is responsible for the expansion of when a fetus is viable and for the extension of human life at the opposite end of the envelop as well) then it is an independent member of its species and should be given the full rights and protections of one. Before then, it’s continued existence, and it’s potential to become human is totally dependent on the host (mother) who, as an existing independent member of the species, has rights a fetus does not. A woman is in her 24th week of pregnancy and she experiences an abruption (placenta separates from the uterus). The fetus has the potential lung development at that point to have a good chance at surviving on its own after delivery. Of course, in this instance, a natural delivery is not going to happen and the baby is going to die unless heroic medical attention is given (cesarean section). This all has to happen in a matter of minutes or the mother will bleed to death internally and the baby will suffer brain damage. However, even in this case, the 24 week old baby will be sent to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and will remain there a long time. It will be given extended care until it has time to develop and grow enough. Is that fetus, before it is taken out, or the baby, in the NICU, considered human by your criteria? Would it be acceptable for the doctor to abort this baby as it is taken out at the mother’s request? the fact that the fetus must be put on life support to survive, that it still requires the environment of the womb to grow, means it is still a potential human ie. a fetus, not a human baby. It is really rather easy not matter how much you attempt to cloud the waters. So again. When it is capable of surviving in the environment its species occupies (using its own organic processes) it is a functional member of its species, before then it is only a potential member. This standard can be demonstrated again and again, using recognized scientific methods vs the 'i feel, i believe' stance adopted by those who use religion to make such determinations. There really isn’t much reason for this debate once we take feelings, belief, and religion out of the equation. if you put the 24 week fetus on the table while you tended to the mother, would it be alive when you came back? (you say 'on its own' but 'on it's on' does not include technological developments designed to replicate the womb environment.) If the answer is ‘yes’ then it is human, if the answer is 'no' then it is still a fetus, and will never become human without a host environment (natural or artificial) if the mother does not wish such heroic measure (ICU) be taken, the doctor isnt 'aborting' anything. Ps. Caesarian can hardly be considered a 'heroic' medical procedure by modern medicine.. By it self it does not create an artificial environment to continue to support life that cannot survive in the human environment.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #96 July 30, 2004 QuoteI prefer my feta to be served with a nice wee salad, and a light olive oil dressing. your all absolutely wrong... feta goes best on pizza, with alfredo, ham and artichokes...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrunkMonkey 0 #97 July 30, 2004 Cats say meow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #98 July 30, 2004 QuoteI scientifically rationalize that human life starts when the genetic material of a human female mixes with the genetic material of a human male to form a distinct new human. please explain your 'rational' and the scientific standard by which you reached it. Also please show the scientific definition of 'human' that fits with your rationalization.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DrunkMonkey 0 #99 July 30, 2004 Snakes say "hiss!" So do pissed off housecats. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #100 July 30, 2004 QuoteIt is really rather easy not matter how much you attempt to cloud the waters. So again. When it is capable of surviving in the environment its species occupies (using its own organic processes) it is a functional member of its species, before then it is only a potential member This is some of the worst logic I have ever seen you use. Quoteif you put the 24 week fetus on the table while you tended to the mother, would it be alive when you came back? (you say 'on its own' but 'on it's on' does not include technological developments designed to replicate the womb environment.) If the answer is ‘yes’ then it is human, if the answer is 'no' then it is still a fetus, and will never become human without a host environment (natural or artificial) If you take a 6mth old and put them on a table....They will not survive. You are debating the EXTENT of the care. But both are nothing without support."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 4 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
nacmacfeegle 0 #88 July 30, 2004 Y'see this just another example of the fundamental difference between you and I.... I prefer my feta to be served with a nice wee salad, and a light olive oil dressing.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #89 July 30, 2004 QuoteQuoteAs someone said sometime before, "I like feta cheese. It tastes good on gyros." Time to eat, I'm starving, gotta go! Later... That would've been me! Thought that sounded like a drunken monkey! I can dig it! Sometimes, it's very appropriate, fitting, and useful. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdweller 0 #90 July 30, 2004 Some non religious people, I dare say, also believe that life begins prior to the time defined by Zenister and might also believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Find one. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I scientifically rationalize that human life starts when the genetic material of a human female mixes with the genetic material of a human male to form a distinct new human. However I do not believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. In fact not using these existing stem cells seems to me anyway to be a waste.------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #91 July 30, 2004 QuotePlease define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. QuotePlease notice I did NOT say the current system was perfect.... and the police/prosecutors/whoever involved in those cases where police/prosecutor malfeasance have been proven should be serving time for it. By your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? QuoteThis one I touched on earlier - the advancement of the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. This I lay squarely at the feet of defense attorneys and the media. The victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. QuoteToo many people in jail for trivial infractions of the law and not enough "hard time" for violent felons. Where is the punishment in satellite tv, weight rooms, full library facilities and the like? I'm sorry, but I believe in "hard time" - they should be paying back their debt to society, not lounging back on my dime. Then repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdweller 0 #92 July 30, 2004 Please define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Thats as far as I had to read before the word "DITTO" came to mind------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #93 July 30, 2004 Quote What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. What's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? Mine's zero... and equally as attainable as YOUR zero. QuoteBy your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? It wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves... murder two, maybe? Don't know...does murder two carry the death penalty, and does the circumstance merit it? QuoteThe victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. Agreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? QuoteThen repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Agreed, on repealing ALL the "war on this" "war on that" laws... they're nothing but feel-good window dressing for the most part that do absolutely nothing about the root cause of the problems.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #94 July 30, 2004 QuoteWhat's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? As many as possible without risking the execution of the innocent. And there's a simple solution to that without increasing the risk of actual criminals being released by mistake. Life in prison, no parole. That way your criminal is kept away from society, and my innocent person has an opportunity for redemption if new evidence turns up. If you kill them, that opportunity is lost forever. And you can always rearrest someone released by mistake. You cant' unkill someone. QuoteIt wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves Murder for hire is first degree. QuoteAgreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? Executing someone doesn't make the victim any more safe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #95 July 30, 2004 first. pointing out the use of fallacy (the 'strawman' a very commonly used fallacy on this board) is not a insult. Whenever anyone uses blatantly invalid arguments or fallacies it is important to point them out to avoid clouding the discussion. [I](what you said I posted vs what was actually posted)[/I] Quoteas to late term abortions? if the fetus is capable of surviving on its own without heroic medical attention (and remember science not religion is responsible for the expansion of when a fetus is viable and for the extension of human life at the opposite end of the envelop as well) then it is an independent member of its species and should be given the full rights and protections of one. Before then, it’s continued existence, and it’s potential to become human is totally dependent on the host (mother) who, as an existing independent member of the species, has rights a fetus does not. A woman is in her 24th week of pregnancy and she experiences an abruption (placenta separates from the uterus). The fetus has the potential lung development at that point to have a good chance at surviving on its own after delivery. Of course, in this instance, a natural delivery is not going to happen and the baby is going to die unless heroic medical attention is given (cesarean section). This all has to happen in a matter of minutes or the mother will bleed to death internally and the baby will suffer brain damage. However, even in this case, the 24 week old baby will be sent to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and will remain there a long time. It will be given extended care until it has time to develop and grow enough. Is that fetus, before it is taken out, or the baby, in the NICU, considered human by your criteria? Would it be acceptable for the doctor to abort this baby as it is taken out at the mother’s request? the fact that the fetus must be put on life support to survive, that it still requires the environment of the womb to grow, means it is still a potential human ie. a fetus, not a human baby. It is really rather easy not matter how much you attempt to cloud the waters. So again. When it is capable of surviving in the environment its species occupies (using its own organic processes) it is a functional member of its species, before then it is only a potential member. This standard can be demonstrated again and again, using recognized scientific methods vs the 'i feel, i believe' stance adopted by those who use religion to make such determinations. There really isn’t much reason for this debate once we take feelings, belief, and religion out of the equation. if you put the 24 week fetus on the table while you tended to the mother, would it be alive when you came back? (you say 'on its own' but 'on it's on' does not include technological developments designed to replicate the womb environment.) If the answer is ‘yes’ then it is human, if the answer is 'no' then it is still a fetus, and will never become human without a host environment (natural or artificial) if the mother does not wish such heroic measure (ICU) be taken, the doctor isnt 'aborting' anything. Ps. Caesarian can hardly be considered a 'heroic' medical procedure by modern medicine.. By it self it does not create an artificial environment to continue to support life that cannot survive in the human environment.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdweller 0 #90 July 30, 2004 Some non religious people, I dare say, also believe that life begins prior to the time defined by Zenister and might also believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Find one. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I scientifically rationalize that human life starts when the genetic material of a human female mixes with the genetic material of a human male to form a distinct new human. However I do not believe that experimenting with existing stem cells is wrong. In fact not using these existing stem cells seems to me anyway to be a waste.------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #91 July 30, 2004 QuotePlease define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. QuotePlease notice I did NOT say the current system was perfect.... and the police/prosecutors/whoever involved in those cases where police/prosecutor malfeasance have been proven should be serving time for it. By your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? QuoteThis one I touched on earlier - the advancement of the rights of the accused at the expense of the rights of the victim. This I lay squarely at the feet of defense attorneys and the media. The victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. QuoteToo many people in jail for trivial infractions of the law and not enough "hard time" for violent felons. Where is the punishment in satellite tv, weight rooms, full library facilities and the like? I'm sorry, but I believe in "hard time" - they should be paying back their debt to society, not lounging back on my dime. Then repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdweller 0 #92 July 30, 2004 Please define "a number of cases" for me.. I can recall two or maybe three over the last few years. I'd honestly like to know the number. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Thats as far as I had to read before the word "DITTO" came to mind------------------------------------------------------ "From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #93 July 30, 2004 Quote What's your cut off number for how many citizens it is ok for the gov't to mistakenly execute? Mine's zero. What's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? Mine's zero... and equally as attainable as YOUR zero. QuoteBy your thinking, shouldn't they get the death penalty themselves if they willfully and knowingly caused the death of an innocent person through deception? It wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves... murder two, maybe? Don't know...does murder two carry the death penalty, and does the circumstance merit it? QuoteThe victim has already been victimized a trial outcome doesn't chagne that. Justice should not be about revenge. It should be about doing the right thing which is to punish the guilty but more importantly to NOT punish the innocent. Then you just have state sponsored victimazationof someone else. Agreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? QuoteThen repeal the draconian drug laws. And as far as lounging around, where are you drawing your conclusions from? Have you been in or visited a prison? Agreed, on repealing ALL the "war on this" "war on that" laws... they're nothing but feel-good window dressing for the most part that do absolutely nothing about the root cause of the problems.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #94 July 30, 2004 QuoteWhat's the cutoff number for how many criminals being mistakenly released to kill again? As many as possible without risking the execution of the innocent. And there's a simple solution to that without increasing the risk of actual criminals being released by mistake. Life in prison, no parole. That way your criminal is kept away from society, and my innocent person has an opportunity for redemption if new evidence turns up. If you kill them, that opportunity is lost forever. And you can always rearrest someone released by mistake. You cant' unkill someone. QuoteIt wouldn't be murder in the first degree, because they didn't do the deed themselves Murder for hire is first degree. QuoteAgreed... but at what point do we say "this person has been through enough"? Executing someone doesn't make the victim any more safe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #95 July 30, 2004 first. pointing out the use of fallacy (the 'strawman' a very commonly used fallacy on this board) is not a insult. Whenever anyone uses blatantly invalid arguments or fallacies it is important to point them out to avoid clouding the discussion. [I](what you said I posted vs what was actually posted)[/I] Quoteas to late term abortions? if the fetus is capable of surviving on its own without heroic medical attention (and remember science not religion is responsible for the expansion of when a fetus is viable and for the extension of human life at the opposite end of the envelop as well) then it is an independent member of its species and should be given the full rights and protections of one. Before then, it’s continued existence, and it’s potential to become human is totally dependent on the host (mother) who, as an existing independent member of the species, has rights a fetus does not. A woman is in her 24th week of pregnancy and she experiences an abruption (placenta separates from the uterus). The fetus has the potential lung development at that point to have a good chance at surviving on its own after delivery. Of course, in this instance, a natural delivery is not going to happen and the baby is going to die unless heroic medical attention is given (cesarean section). This all has to happen in a matter of minutes or the mother will bleed to death internally and the baby will suffer brain damage. However, even in this case, the 24 week old baby will be sent to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and will remain there a long time. It will be given extended care until it has time to develop and grow enough. Is that fetus, before it is taken out, or the baby, in the NICU, considered human by your criteria? Would it be acceptable for the doctor to abort this baby as it is taken out at the mother’s request? the fact that the fetus must be put on life support to survive, that it still requires the environment of the womb to grow, means it is still a potential human ie. a fetus, not a human baby. It is really rather easy not matter how much you attempt to cloud the waters. So again. When it is capable of surviving in the environment its species occupies (using its own organic processes) it is a functional member of its species, before then it is only a potential member. This standard can be demonstrated again and again, using recognized scientific methods vs the 'i feel, i believe' stance adopted by those who use religion to make such determinations. There really isn’t much reason for this debate once we take feelings, belief, and religion out of the equation. if you put the 24 week fetus on the table while you tended to the mother, would it be alive when you came back? (you say 'on its own' but 'on it's on' does not include technological developments designed to replicate the womb environment.) If the answer is ‘yes’ then it is human, if the answer is 'no' then it is still a fetus, and will never become human without a host environment (natural or artificial) if the mother does not wish such heroic measure (ICU) be taken, the doctor isnt 'aborting' anything. Ps. Caesarian can hardly be considered a 'heroic' medical procedure by modern medicine.. By it self it does not create an artificial environment to continue to support life that cannot survive in the human environment.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #96 July 30, 2004 QuoteI prefer my feta to be served with a nice wee salad, and a light olive oil dressing. your all absolutely wrong... feta goes best on pizza, with alfredo, ham and artichokes...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #97 July 30, 2004 Cats say meow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #98 July 30, 2004 QuoteI scientifically rationalize that human life starts when the genetic material of a human female mixes with the genetic material of a human male to form a distinct new human. please explain your 'rational' and the scientific standard by which you reached it. Also please show the scientific definition of 'human' that fits with your rationalization.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrunkMonkey 0 #99 July 30, 2004 Snakes say "hiss!" So do pissed off housecats. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #100 July 30, 2004 QuoteIt is really rather easy not matter how much you attempt to cloud the waters. So again. When it is capable of surviving in the environment its species occupies (using its own organic processes) it is a functional member of its species, before then it is only a potential member This is some of the worst logic I have ever seen you use. Quoteif you put the 24 week fetus on the table while you tended to the mother, would it be alive when you came back? (you say 'on its own' but 'on it's on' does not include technological developments designed to replicate the womb environment.) If the answer is ‘yes’ then it is human, if the answer is 'no' then it is still a fetus, and will never become human without a host environment (natural or artificial) If you take a 6mth old and put them on a table....They will not survive. You are debating the EXTENT of the care. But both are nothing without support."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
