Peter, It is still a HUMAN BEING all the way; no side-stepping can get around that. It is on a continuum of growth and development from the zygote phase onward. At NO point on that continuum can you say it changed into a Person. A "person" is just an arbitrary term you are using to identify it with your own definition of "really, really human", and to avoid admitting that it is always a Human.
Just because you don't remember things from when you were 2 yrs old doesn't mean you weren't human then--just that your brain had not developed to the point of having long term memory. I could probably just as easily argue the point with you that Teenagers are not fully Human (having raised a couple myself; and knowing for a fact that they have NO brains, only hormones and emotions), if you want to get nit-picky about things. As far as the appearance of an aardvark, if you would kindly forward a photo of yourself to TT, we can observe it for any similarities. :-) Izzy -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Peter Eyland Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Stand for the Unborn! On 22/1/03 11:18 AM, "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter, Are you saying that a human life is NOT a human person? Then > whattheheck is it??? Wouldnıt you agree that they are both HUMANS? (Iım > assuming that prior to your birth you were not an aardvark.) Izzy G'day Izzy, Laura et al Brrrr! Laura, I think that I will only go to Nashville in the Summer, assuming it is above zero Celsius then :) Izzy, I find language can be a real problem as words come with a whole semantic domain ("areas" of meaning). "Human life" does this as it has a number of meanings (well OK it's 2 words). Bible writers say that God gives and takes away breath and links this to the life which He gives. Paul writes, that if you are not born you can do nothing either good or bad. I take it from the Bible then, that a human person is created when the newly-born takes its first breath of air. This distinguishes it from a still born child which grew in the womb; moved and kicked and yet never came to be a living person. (Sorry if this creates any painful memories.) It was clearly human life in a species sense, but never A human life in the sense of a living breathing person. Biologists and medical ethicists have great difficulty in deciding what can be done or not done at various times, because there is no real consensus as to what human status a zygote/blastomere/morula/blastocyst/embryo/foetus has at any time. Oh, there seems some agreement that successful implantation makes a difference and that zygotes are not persons in any way. Since women do absorb the occasional zygote and embryo back into their bodies, personhood for these, would make a lot of women multiple persons or even perhaps cannibals. Like most people, I can't remember anything before I was 2 years old, as cognitive memory hadn't formed before that. Maybe I was an aardvark - that would explain a few things :). By the way, what do they look like? Cheers Peter -- Peter Eyland Sydney Australia Web page: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~epe ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
