Freethought & Rationalism Archive

infidelchic · 04-30-2003, 01:19 PM

LWF,
You didn't know I'm a chimp?

Dr Rick · 04-30-2003, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by long winded fool
Chimpanzees do not fall under the human family, because, though chimpanzees are of the family Hominidae, they are not of the group homo, which is required for an animal to be classified a human.

...lwf tries to contradict his own "reasoning."

The UNDHR specifically says human family in the preamble, which lwf has argued must include fetuses. By his fallacious reasoning (that the human family should be interpreted in the UNDHR with the "scientific" definition of the term) that would also include chimpanzees.

The UNDHR does not specify only members of the group homo; he just threw that in ad hoc

Quote:

If the UDHR said all members of the hominid family, then you would be correct.

He's contradicted himself, again. Following this reversal of his "reasoning", if the UNDHR specified fetuses, then he wouldn't be wrong.

Rick

Dr. Retard · 04-30-2003, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theMomma
Maybe I'd try sharecropping.

Men really should stay out of the whole abortion issue. It's not their privacy and their medical care that people want to take control over.

Yeah, because the uterus is the fount of all moral wisdom.

yguy · 04-30-2003, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theMomma
Men really should stay out of the whole abortion issue. It's not their privacy and their medical care that people want to take control over.

It's not your body that is in danger of being ripped apart by a suction machine, so maybe you shouldn't have a say in it either.

long winded fool · 04-30-2003, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theMomma
Maybe I'd try sharecropping.

Men really should stay out of the whole abortion issue. It's not their privacy and their medical care that people want to take control over. If they were truely concerned with the unborn, they'd be using all those resources to make there be less of a need for abortion.

Don't you see that this is the equivalent of saying that white non-slave owners should stay out of the African slave issue? The legal abortion issue is the business of all people, not just women. There are no such things as women's rights. There are human rights.

long winded fool · 04-30-2003, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr Rick
...lwf tries to contradict his own "reasoning."

The UNDHR specifically says human family in the preamble, which lwf has argued must include fetuses. By his fallacious reasoning (that the human family should be interpreted in the UNDHR with the "scientific" definition of the term) that would also include chimpanzees.

The UNDHR does not specify only members of the group homo; he just threw that in ad hoc

Blatantly false! The UDHR does specify all humans. Chimpanzees cannot be members of the human family because they are not human beings. What is a human being? A human being is an animal of the family Hominidae of the genus homo and nowadays of the species sapiens, though other species of human being once existed. A chimpanzee is an animal of the family Pongidae of the genus Pan and species troglodytes. In no way can it be considered a human. There is absolutely no logical dilemma in this area.

theMomma · 04-30-2003, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by long winded fool
Don't you see that this is the equivalent of saying that white non-slave owners should stay out of the African slave issue? The legal abortion issue is the business of all people, not just women. There are no such things as women's rights. There are human rights.

I certainly don't see that it's the equivalent. Abortion isn't a matter of "women's rights." It's a matter of women's medical care though, just as all aspects of gynocology are.

Why don't you understand no matter what the laws are, you are not going to prevent abortions? You're just going to end up having more women die from them. So why not devote the energy into pregnancy prevention?

infidelchic · 04-30-2003, 04:06 PM

Perhaps I should have said similar to a chimp. I can't wait to hear LWF's babbling on and on and about this.....

yguy · 04-30-2003, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theMomma
Why don't you understand no matter what the laws are, you are not going to prevent abortions?

Why don't you care that abortion is the killing of a human being?

Monkeybot · 04-30-2003, 04:37 PM

A human being and a person are different things.

A brain dead human being in a coma may not be considered a person. A super-advanced android (like Data) might be considered a non-human person. If an animal species were shown to be capable of reason, it might also attain the status of personhood.

Now, where does this leave a fetus? Honestly, I've not the medical knowledge nor the fortitude to argue this one way or the other. It's just something I thought I'd toss in (forgive me if I'm merely repeating what others have said -- I also haven't the fortitude to read this entire thread

). Having human genetic material does not automatically confer personhood on an organism.

View Poll Results: Abortion, terminate when?
Never	19	12.18%
Up to one month	5	3.21%
Up to two months	7	4.49%
Up to three months	42	26.92%
Up to four months	14	8.97%
up to five months	7	4.49%
Up to six months	25	16.03%
Up to seven months	1	0.64%
Up to eight months	17	10.90%
Infanticide is OK	19	12.18%
Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-30-2003, 01:19 PM	#391
infidelchic Banned Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: USA Posts: 41	LWF, You didn't know I'm a chimp?

04-30-2003, 04:06 PM	#398
infidelchic Banned Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: USA Posts: 41	Perhaps I should have said similar to a chimp. I can't wait to hear LWF's babbling on and on and about this.....

04-30-2003, 04:37 PM	#400
Monkeybot Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: North Carolina Posts: 8,102	A human being and a person are different things. A brain dead human being in a coma may not be considered a person. A super-advanced android (like Data) might be considered a non-human person. If an animal species were shown to be capable of reason, it might also attain the status of personhood. Now, where does this leave a fetus? Honestly, I've not the medical knowledge nor the fortitude to argue this one way or the other. It's just something I thought I'd toss in (forgive me if I'm merely repeating what others have said -- I also haven't the fortitude to read this entire thread ). Having human genetic material does not automatically confer personhood on an organism.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.