 |
 |
Paula, if you believe personhood begins at implantation you should have not have any trouble with nuclear transfer or embryonic stem cell research. Your position would be like that of Mormon Sen. Orrin Hatch. The cells and research we are talking about takes place in a petri dish, not a womb. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paula Nixon" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 11:52 PM Subject: Re: CA lawsuit for embryo Mary Scott Doe > Amanda, > Isn't a person that is unconscious, perhaps under anesthesia a living > being? How about a 6 month fetus, that could live if it were born. The > prenatal age of viability keeps getting pushed back farther and farther. > Maybe it will be 5 months. Isn't it still a person? If it is born full > term, it requires constant attention to keep it alive. Isn't it still a > person? That frozen lump, it's not a dog or a monkey, it's human. Given > food and oxygen it will be a person. I personally think person hood > begins at implantation, but this does give room for ethical studies. It's > not cut and dried and not necessarily the way we want it to be. > Paula > > Amanda Phillips <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > hang on - person = conscious individual = living being, which not = small > frozen lump with no functions indicating the above ? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn