20 Jul 09
Originally posted by NimzovichLarsenCommon sense is quite uncommon.
It's circumstantial evidence but with a little common sense you can draw a reasonable conclusion that one is not man made. A murderer can be convicted with circumstantial evidence---much less cirucmstantial evidence than we have for a God.
21 Jul 09
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI think most people are refering to an embryo latched onto the walls of a uterus when the word potential is used.
If you read my last post you would see that I said:
[b]…I didn’t say they WILL become a child but rather they CAN become a child if they are cloned.
….[/b]
21 Jul 09
Originally posted by Proper KnobThat is a good one. How about if there is a fire at Pizza Hut and you have the choice to save a man or a pregnant woman?
The best argument I have ever heard for why young fetuses / embryos are not human is this:
If you walk by a in vitro fertilization clinic and it is on fire and burning to the ground and you have a choice to save either:
(A) 10,000 embryos
or
(B) a 5 year old
What would you do?
21 Jul 09
Originally posted by joe beyser…I also suspect you might be a very long way from Andrew Hamilton's position,
I think most people are refering to an embryo latched onto the walls of a uterus when the word potential is used.
….
-an embryo before or after its brain becomes active enough for there to credibly be some consciousness in it? -admittedly it is a huge grey area to define about at what stage that is (which only science could eventually answer) but, never a less, I think whatever the answer to that question is is relevant here because if the answer is “before” then that embryo is no more conscious than a single cell so killing it wouldn’t be much different from killing a single cell in that respect.
21 Jul 09
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobwhat if the choice was
The best argument I have ever heard for why young fetuses / embryos are not human is this:
If you walk by a in vitro fertilization clinic and it is on fire and burning to the ground and you have a choice to save either:
(A) 10,000 embryos
or
(B) a 5 year old
What would you do?
(A) 10,000 children (but you have no idea who or where they are)
(B) a 5 year old crying in agony in the same room that you are in
or - there is a 5-year old in front of you. If you shoot and kill this child, you know that 10,000 lives will be saved somewhere. Would you be able to do this?
21 Jul 09
Originally posted by MelanerpesYou mean 10,000 who are already born? If so I would pick the one that I think I could save the most lives.
what if the choice was
(A) 10,000 children (but you have no idea who or where they are)
(B) a 5 year old crying in agony in the same room that you are in
21 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by daniel58that would be the rational thing to do -- but people (even very caring people) care much more about a few people they directly can see and experience, and ignore things like the "27,000 children that died last night"
You mean 10,000 who are already born? If so I would pick the one that I think I could save the most lives.