Replies

I explicitly stated that I do not believe in such a moment, that it is in fact you who believes that.

So why doesn't the moment happen at conception? Asked another way, why doesn't the beginning of personhood happen at the beginning of unique existence - as defined by the presence of unique DNA distinguishing child from mother? For utilitarian reasons, no doubt - it's inconvenient.

Given your last paragraph, I would like to know whether you believe in absolute truth. If not, why would words mean anything; why would our DI and Constitution carry any weight at all; what would be the basis for law?

Also, you may wish to review posts #242 and #244.

Why then do we speak of a "you" and a "me"? Under this view, there is no distinction in persons since there is no moment of separation of identities from parents. You've effectively undermined all further debate by unwittingly proposing that all humanity is part of one giant organism.

Nice try at misinterpreting my words. But I stated that it's difficult to pinpoint the exact time (if there is an exact time), not that a person never truly becomes independent or a living human being, or whatever you're saying. It's more of an evolution (though you probably don't believe in evolution).

So why doesn't the moment happen at conception?

Why does it?

Asked another way, why doesn't the beginning of personhood happen at the beginning of unique existence - as defined by the presence of unique DNA distinguishing child from mother? For utilitarian reasons, no doubt - it's inconvenient.

Not because it's inconvenient, I couldn't give a damn, because I'm not female, nor am I careless. It causes no inconvenience to me. The problem is that your argument simply isn't persuasive.

Given your last paragraph, I would like to know whether you believe in absolute truth.

Absolutely, but absolute truth is limited in quantity. I think experience has shown us that.

Also, you may wish to review posts #242 and #244.

I already reviewed them.