Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 04:12:54 -0700
On Aug 18, 9:15 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 18 Aug 2007 18:51:14 GMT, Jim Yanik <jya...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:hj6ec3tdk20623ct1tfs68km74moebfutm@xxxxxxx:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 15:34:07 GMT, Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
<n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 05:52:29 +0000, JosephKK wrote:
Jim Thompson To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx posted...
On 15 Aug 2007 14:01:44 GMT, Jim Yanik <jya...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It's just more BDS;Bush Derangement Syndrome.
But xray and Win vote. If Hillary is elected things will get so
bad that Carter will appear to be a good President ;-)
On this i agree. Obama would just as bad. Both of them would make
even Nixon look good.
I don't like Fred Thompson any more, because on the TeeVee I saw/heard
him say, "I am definitely pro-life." So he's against Womens' right to
life, liberty, and property.
Whose property are your organs, after all?
A baby is not somebody's organ; it a person of its own.
John
Only AFTER it's born,separated from the mother.
Until then,the fetus can and does affect the health of the mother,is
literally INSIDE the mother,thus still a PART of her.
No. It is genetically distinct. It is another being.
Think about the implications of that claim. So is every one of her
eggs and every one of your sperm.
Preventing you from aborting any one of your sperm coud keep the
courts very busy.
Her blood flows thru
the fetus,her body supplies it's oxygen and nourishes it.
Her blood does not flow through the fetus. If it did, one or both of
them would die, because they are not immunologically compatible.
Because they are different people.
Right, her blood only flows through the placenta. But while the mother
is a person, the question of whether the fetus is a person is
essentially what is being discussed here, and there are lots of good
pragmatic reasons for requiring that a human being has to be a
distinct and self-sustaining individual before they can be recognised
as such by the law. I went through them here a few years ago.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
.
- References:
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Tim Wescott
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: xray
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Jim Yanik
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: JosephKK
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: Jim Yanik
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: is the AGW bubble about to burst?
- Next by Date: Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- Previous by thread: Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- Next by thread: Re: Freeman Dyson on heresy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|