home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!ehsn21.cen.uiuc.edu!parker
- From: parker@ehsn21.cen.uiuc.edu (Robert S. Parker)
- Subject: Re: Spoken Like a True ProLifer
- References: <30DEC92.15253702@vax.clarku.edu> <C031zB.6nE@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <30DEC92.18072448@vax.clarku.edu> <C04w4u.CBs@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Dec31.184629.13119@watson.ibm.com> <C05Bpu.GLE@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <1993Jan01.021528.12340@watson.ibm.com> <C0CBnL.Myn@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Message-ID: <C0KGKD.4s7@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
- Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
- Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
- Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 03:04:59 GMT
- Lines: 22
-
- vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu () writes:
-
- >A child is still a person. A teenager is still a person. An adult is
- >still a person. A fetus is still a person. Why not call a person a person?
- >These are all simply labels on the life cycle of a human being.
-
- No, we abscribe a higher meaning to "person" than simply a "human being", in
- order to label those individuals that we have reason to give true moral value.
-
- Some readers on t.a are unable to understand the distinction that not all
- human beings have sentience and a personality. (Those that are sentient are
- "people".) I see no reason to give full moral value to something that is not
- sentient. I see no realistic evidence that the unborn could be sentient in
- at least the first 6 months. The bodily-autonomy folks will say that the fact
- that the fetus is or is not sentient has nothing to do with whether abortion
- should be allowed. Others of us argue that non-personity is the reason it is
- not immoral while bodily-autonomy is one possible reason that it would be
- desired.
-
- >Edward Simmonds
-
- -Rob
-