Killing People

[Joachim]

I anticipated the first two answers, and I think they're technically fair answers. But it doesn't as much surprise me that they come from people with atheist icons, as it does that they come from people with U.S. Democrat icons. For sake of consistency I hope I don't ever catch them criticizing U.S. or Israeli military actions based upon inadvertent civilian casualties.

You know, the Republicans were criticizing the war against Serbia back in the 90's because of "civilian casualties." It worked though, Kosovo has their freedom and we were able to destablize the Milosevic regime. If there is one Muslim country on earth that truly loves us it is Albania. I will gladly take Muslims who love us over Christians like the Armenians who are in the back pocket of Russia even as their brothers in Georgia have to fight off invasions for resisting oppression.

 

[tcampen]

You're comparing a headless corpse attached to a machine to a healthy baby in the womb - I don't think that's a good comparison.

No, I'm trying to establish what makes a person a "person". If 94% of a person remains healthy and intact, and the only thing missing is the head, is it still a person? Is a human embryo composed of no more than 8 undifferentiated cell really a "baby"? This is a baby?

I understand potentiality, but that's not really relevant. I'm talking right here, right now. Is this (8 cell human embryo) more of a person, more of a human being, than the adult who is 94% there and healthy, but just missing the head? How so?

 

[No Swansong]

No, I'm trying to establish what makes a person a "person". If 94% of a person remains healthy and intact, and the only thing missing is the head, is it still a person? Is a human embryo composed of no more than 8 undifferentiated cell really a "baby"? This is a baby?

I understand potentiality, but that's not really relevant. I'm talking right here, right now. Is this (8 cell human embryo) more of a person, more of a human being, than the adult who is 94% there and healthy, but just missing the head? How so?

Why do you think that personhood is the measure of what is human life worth protecting?

 

[Chesterton]

No, I'm trying to establish what makes a person a "person".

I don't think that's really relevant, aside from the legal aspect, which I'm trying to avoid in this thread.

If 94% of a person remains healthy and intact, and the only thing missing is the head, is it still a person?

It's an ex-person, a former person, a dead person. If it were a parrot that I bought, I would return it to the pet shop.

Is a human embryo composed of no more than 8 undifferentiated cell really a "baby"? This is a baby?

Again, labels like "person" and "baby" and "cells" are not relevant. Two labels which seem relevant to me are ones which I don't think you can disagree with: he or she is "living" and "human". Those labels apply to you and me also.

I understand potentiality, but that's not really relevant. I'm talking right here, right now. Is this (8 cell human embryo) more of a person, more of a human being, than the adult who is 94% there and healthy, but just missing the head? How so?

No, it's not more or less of a person, but if you insist on the label, it's a different kind of person; a living person as opposed to the headless adult who is a dead person.