 |
 |
I agree, Mary Ann, we are talking about "potential" not "actual" lives. It seems to me we have quite enough to do dealing with actual lives with Huntington's Disease, ALS and paralysis, without battling about fantasies. Just how does one develop a moral or philosophical construct for potential human beings? Just what rights and obligations does a potential "person" possess? What is the nature of a potential person? Is an egg or sperm half a life? Are these the questions we should be asking and spending our time on or should we be concerned about real people? All of his would make for a nice philosophical discussion if people weren't being blown up in wars and unable to move due to disease. I will always come down on the side of reality. Always. Every time. Ray ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Ann Ryan" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 5:49 AM Subject: Re: Cells are not people > Sorry, Ray. The issue has to do with using *potential* human beings, not > just cells. > There is a moral issue here, whether you think so or not. > ---------- > Mary Ann > www.bentwillowfarm.org > ----- Original Message ----- > >> The controversy has to do with using C-E-L-L-S, Mary Ann, not people. Ray >> > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/461 - Release Date: 10/2/2006 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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