Quote from x0mbiec0rp
That is not a controlled experiment. In fact, what that's actually known as is a case study. And again, it doesn't take into account the similarity of adoptive environments, or even how being in a similar region would play into personality. It's very easy to argue that most of these similarities are completely coincidental.
It is one single experiment of many that study genetics and personality.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
That's a matter of opinion. You also fail to take in to account that man has been using his advanced intelligence to disrupt the process of evolution for quite some time. Most would argue that inaction to save a childs life from a curable disease is immoral, yet it uses man's intelligence to avoid an otherwise unavoidable event, and potentially disrupt the genetic pool. In the grander scheme of things, perhaps it's evil because it alters the survivability of man. Before you declare some evil, make sure it's not just an opinion.
A deaf person wants their child genetically modified to be deaf, is it not evil? I would also point out that any genetic modifications would really come before the fertilization of the egg and would come by guaranteeing certain results. Any modification after fertilization is certainly a greater moral hazard no matter what justifications you think you have.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
Really? You don't think that every cell in a body has a complete set of human genetic information? Because they definitely do. Right there in the nucleus. They simply don't utilize it, and function primarily using RNA. Now, anyways, onto the organ argument. Remember, while your argument doesn't take organs into account, mine does. Say I'm killed by a murderer. If I have donated a kidney to save a man's life, does that mean the 'murderer' can't be charged with murder, since a part of my unique genetic code lives on in that other man?
Yes and no. It has all the DNA within the nucleus, but they aren't active and thus do not produce to RNA copies of the DNA. A zygote is wholly different from a kidney. A kidney does not have a distinct DNA of its own, it has your specific combination of active DNA.
A kidney cannot grow into an infant and then later into an adult no matter how long you wait.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
A zygote is an incomplete human. So is a fetus. It cannot survive on its own, just like my kidney. My kidney has its own unique genetic code, now, and so does the fetus/zygote. Neither can currently reproduce, yet each could be used to form a new human being if utilized properly.
An infant is an incomplete human. An infant cannot survive on its own nor can it reproduce. Are you going to tell me it isn't human? As I said, zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, and adult all are nothing but stages in development. It is still the same individual and it is human throughout its life.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
Yet, in the law, some people have these rights removed. Children don't have the complete set of these rights, nor do many mental patients, and many people otherwise incapacitated in some way. You have made an assumption that isn't necessarily verified by the law, especially in cases where an individual has less than optimal mental or physical capabilities.
There are many laws that violate one's rights, doesn't make them right. Be it, child, or mental patient, they all have their right to life. A child by extension has their right to property and liberty via their parents. Surely you do not want to argue that a parent should be allowed to kill their child, no matter their age.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
Sure it does. It's just defective. Now considering humanity is, from an evolutionary perspective, the results of countless cell defects that turned out beneficial, I think it's perfectly fair to argue that these cancer cells are human. The question is, much like an unborn child, at what point can we draw the line?
Line? The cancer cells are still your cells with your DNA.
Quote from x0mbiec0rp
Alright then, let's write a sequel metaphor instead. Instead of throwing the kidnapped victim out of the plane, the two of us finish our flight, after which I feed, clothe, and house the victim, and proceed to brainwash him or her with a new set of principles and way of thinking. Twenty years later, I release him or her back into the world, and continue to monitor his or her actions. Wow, this metaphor makes it sound like it might be an even worse crime to give birth and raise a child. I think you might need a better one.
Don't want a child? Be responsible instead of killing the child when you screw up.
Last edited by harmonious at 3:27 pm, Nov 7 2008
