Posts by Grant Dexter
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I don't know enough about the science of the issue to comment on when exactly personhood comes to pass. I don't think it's relevant to my outlook. i guess when the pregnancy test comes back positive. maybe when the scientists say personhood comes to pass.
This is directly at odds with the story you told before. If you believe a person to be present then why were you so supportive of a woman's right to choose to end that person's life?
-
No. I just wanted to know about that period between conception and personhood. Why do you believe that just after conception a baby is not a person?
-
You said:
sometime in that brief time period between conception and birth.
Which I took to mean you think a baby turns into a person sometime after conception. Is that what you think? If you do think that there is a time when a baby is not a person why do you believe that.
You can forget my comment on objectivity. It is irrelevant. Sorry :)
-
Thanks, Mark. I would hope that with only a little awareness and only a minor amount of international pressure the Chinese government would crack down on the departments that abduct women and force them to terminate.
I'd be interested to know what sort of justification you have for denying personhood for such a brief period of time. I understand it will be very difficult for you to be objective when discussing this issue, but I would still appreciate your input :)
-
Did anyone have a sensible response? Babies at conception are alive and human yet most here seem to deny them personhood. What then is the nature of that humanity and life if it is not enough to be recognised as belonging to a person?
Is the distinction between non-person and person an issue of one or more of the following:
Time.
Size.
Growth.
Recognisability.
A soul.
Convenience.
...?For me the fact that a woman conceives a living human child is enough for me to recognise personhood. On what basis do others deny that personhood.
Or perhaps you recognise babies at conception as people yet justify their termination on other grounds.
Sensible replies would be appreciated :)
-
Truly, Islander, your intellect precedes you! :)
-
Peter. I don't think he'd be able to get a camel through customs. Trust me, I've tried.
-
The human body is an amazing thing :)
There seems far too much legislation and attitude bent toward "switching off" when perhaps legislation and an attitude toward preserving life would reveal more of those amazing secrets.
-
I just don't feel that expressing my opinions about it any more directly or coherently are in my best interests at this particular juncture. What were you hoping for Grant?
OK. I just wondered if you might have some knowledge of the existence of forced abortions in China. I've heard some people speak about the issue, but I think it's generally kept pretty quiet. For obvious reasons.
Anyway. That was a bit of a side issue (perhaps Russell could do some research and post a blog on the issue). The point I was interested in discussing was the nature of the humanity and life of a baby at conception. I understand that most posters here accept the fact that at conception we have life and humanity, but they all reject the personhood of a baby at conception. For me the fact that a woman conceives a baby that is alive and human is enough for me to recognise personhood. I wonder on what basis other people deny that a baby at conception is a person..?
-
Oh. Mark. You're not a condemner? Do you at least have an opinion?