On a philosophy site there is a questions page. One was about finding some answers to abortion. This is what I answered.
Any philosophical answer requires that it be in accord with reality. This seems to be a 'no duh,' but many are willing to defer to opinions or unproven records in support of arguments.
The genes: Of the three prospective owners of the genetic material of the aborted fetus, only the mother/father have ownership of it. The fetus can not own it because it is aborted, dead. The hospital does not own it any more than a mechanic owns my car after fixing the engine. Thus, only the 'parents' have claim because it sprung from them.
The fetal controversy arises from a deeper philosophical issue: what is to be considered human? I answer that a being must be able to think.
What differentiates humans from the other animals? It is our ability to reason. Such is how we became tool-makers par exelance. Reasoning is the basis of all rights. By such, we can understand, for example, the concept of pursuit of happiness. Other animals simply react to their environment with the most basic of responses. These belie a mind shaped by the world and not itself. Thus, until a human being can think, it is not an entity possessed of rights and not a person any more than my arm is.
Some will claim that a human results from the union of the two gamates and even the second-old zygote, if aborted, is a murdered being. That assertion, however, is not founded upon reason but theistic discussions. The claim lies in the mandate that the soul is created by the joining of sperm and ova. It follows that gamates must then contain shards of souls. If such were so, girls would be killers even more than enthusiastic males. Girls release ova throughout their lives, even as babies, until menopause signals the lack thereof. More importantly, no evidence has been shown for the existance of a soul. The typical reaction is to dismiss the need of evidence because the soul lies in a transendial la-la land outside our reach. This is akin to blaming behavior on a subconsious that none can interact with. Both are plain cop-outs. Each is an attempt to say that the universe's properties do not represent all that exists. And so, I refer to my initial statement. Any assertion not grounded in our world is fancy and should be believed as much. If evidence arises of a soul, I will make my apologies and redefine my worldview to fit the new information.
Though this skims much, I hope that it is sufficient to spark your thoughts to the correct path. If you see some different style of discourse, pare it to its essentials and check with what you observe in reality.
8:40 PM
2 Comments:
wow....your like crazy uber smart and stuff......how did monica end up so stupid? // at 8:56 PM by LotrFrEak69 (Francisca?)
geez nick! how DID i end up so stupid? lool i guess its cuz u got all the brains and i got the crazy good looks! lol i'm just joshin ya. // 5/9/2004 at 1:20 PM by Cubancutie716 (Monica)
I really don't like 'Friends.' But I can have the consolation of knowing that I will never hear it again. My family is blaring it now. It feels way too much like the play 'No Skin off your Ass' in The Fountainhead. However, the commercials sometimes verge on Superbowl quality. For example there was a beer commercial listing achievements: putting a room's round on a friend's tab and dating a girl for her brains. More of the latter.
1:21 AM