- Apr 15, 2012
- 64,493
- 30,323
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It is a good argument.
I don't like IVF exactly because of the reason.
In that case, the definition could be refined to include a cell-size level natural process.
Human being can make many exceptions to known natural processes. That is why atheists can never find a definite answer on anything.
You still haven't told us why a gorilla isn't a human...
I did. Because human dominates over gorilla and all other life forms on the earth.
One on one, I'd be less inclined to believe that.
And if "being dominated" is a sign of being less than human, you're going to run into a whole slew of problems...
"today" is the time limitation.
otherwise, I don't see any problem.
I don't get that you are creating a complicated series of exceptions because your definitions of human are arbitrary and problematic, yet you act like your failure reflects badly on atheists?It is a good argument.
I don't like IVF exactly because of the reason.
In that case, the definition could be refined to include a cell-size level natural process.
Human being can make many exceptions to known natural processes. That is why atheists can never find a definite answer on anything.
"Today?" Does that mean that something can be human "today" and not be human tomorrow? Or yesterday?
Because I gotta tell you, about 75 years ago, the Aryans were "dominating" the Jews pretty decisively -- who were the "humans" then?
I don't get that you are creating a complicated series of exceptions because your definitions of human are arbitrary and problematic, yet you act like your failure reflects badly on atheists?
Today means the most recent 5000 years.
Fighting among humans are not part of the argument. The domination of human being is a global feature.
So according to your definition you're saying Abraham Lincoln was shot today?Today means the most recent 5000 years.
Fighting among humans are not part of the argument. The domination of human being is a global feature.
If interfearance by humans is so important to the definition of humanity, why is there an exception for IVF?Not at all. IVF is the only exception to my definition about the "natural process". I don't think there will be another one.
My definition (not mine, in fact), is very critical. It will become more and more critical through time. We have the question such as the one in the OP. And I guarantee you that we will have more serious question of this nature in the near future.
If interfearance by humans is so important to the definition of humanity, why is there an exception for IVF?
What about using drug treatments to alter the development in utero?
What about hosting the child in an unrelated host mother?
What about a child grown from three parents? (Genes from from a mother and father, with a second mother providing mitochondrial DNA, the egg cell and probably hosting).
If some method of creating what I would call people that somehow cross your definition of human, what is the moral and religious position towards them?
Should they just be killed by Blade Runners? Are they demonic by nature? Not afflicted by original sin?
That's horrific.Now, you start to involve religion into this. Different religions surely have different views on these questions. I guess we are talking about Christianity first.
Life is given by God and should not be tempered with human intervention. The Bible may not say so explicitly. But this is a result deduced from Christian theology. An example of negative measure based on this result is the ban of contraception in Catholics. Positively, Christianity should oppose all the processes you have listed above.
You are not going to easily find a logic explanation to the oppositions. I can provide one, but it is long and it involves a few more fundamental issues in Christianity, such as the origin of soul, etc.
A straightforward answer to your question would be: "human" "produced" through human manipulation may not be recognized by God as a human. If God does not recognize them, His followers would not recognize them accordingly.
That's horrific.
The concept of treating someone as less then human because a literal commandment existed is unpleasant... but you don't even have that. You are willing to treat someone on your own opinion about what your God thinks.
The Bible may not say so explicitly. But this is a result deduced from Christian theology.
"human" "produced" through human manipulation may not be recognized by God as a human. If God does not recognize them, His followers would not recognize them accordingly.
I notice that when you use the phrase Christian definition, you seem to mean "Juvenissun's intuition". I'd be very curious to see an actual biblical justification. You say without God I will have no definition, but you have God and your definitions are ad hoc.You asked if something is a human.
I gave you a definition of human.
You asked for a religious definition.
I gave you a Christian definition of human.
You do not accept either.
Yet, you don't have a definition.
Without God, you will never have a definition of human.
You will be deeply confused when more robots, androids, replicants, clones show up in the near future.
I notice that when you use the phrase Christian definition, you seem to mean "Juvenissun's intuition". I'd be very curious to see an actual biblical justification. You say without God I will have no definition, but you have God and your definitions are ad hoc.
I asked you because I was honestly interested. I commented because I feel your definitions and attitudes seem, to me, to be flawed logically and morally.
Christianity is more clear on this issue than any other religion.
God creates human. This is so defined in the first book of the Bible.
God creates everything. Logically, it means human can not create human.
Except new human come about from reproduction and we can't see God doing that.Christianity is more clear on this issue than any other religion.
God creates human. This is so defined in the first book of the Bible.
God creates everything. Logically, it means human can not create human.
Sounds like you just said every single person born of man and woman in history... is not human.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?