subbie - When Does Personhood Begin?

[_subgenius]

Help. I have read the response by subgenius a couple of times, and I can't locate a clear proposition or question.

then move along, because there is no reason for your post here - other than your own masturbatory urges.

[_honorentheos]

subbie -

There are multiple points of conflict in any discussion where the rights involved in the abortion debate are concerned. In that other thread you claimed that liberals were being inconsistent by being concerned with the treatment of children that are being forcibly separated from their parents at our borders due to the policy of the Trump admin but not concerned about a fetus coming to term to be born a human infant.

So you ask if it is reasonable to ask if life is different from personhood. If one defined human life as having human DNA, that would include many objects spanning cells to corpses. If it has to do with consciousness, it would exclude brain dead persons and, well, zygotes. If it has to do with the potential to become human life, so do the male and female gametes or sperm and eggs.

These conflicting concerns about rights all have to do with how one defines personhood because one can't just say it's about life. It's clearly about life with certain other qualities. If you are convinced that the moment a male human sperm fertilizes a female human egg that this is what makes something a human being it would be interesting to see how you make this distinction in your own mind. Is it the DNA? The potential for what it may become? Or what? What makes it a human being with rights? And beyond that, rights that Trump the rights of others?

[_subgenius]

subbie -

There are multiple points of conflict in any discussion where the rights involved in the abortion debate are concerned. In that other thread you claimed that liberals were being inconsistent by being concerned with the treatment of children that are being forcibly separated from their parents at our borders due to the policy of the Trump admin but not concerned about a fetus coming to term to be born a human infant.

So you ask if it is reasonable to ask if life is different from personhood. If one defined human life as having human DNA, that would include many objects spanning cells to corpses. If it has to do with consciousness, it would exclude brain dead persons and, well, zygotes. If it has to do with the potential to become human life, so do the male and female gametes or sperm and eggs.

These conflicting concerns about rights all have to do with how one defines personhood because one can't just say it's about life. It's clearly about life with certain other qualities. If you are convinced that the moment a male human sperm fertilizes a female human egg that this is what makes something a human being it would be interesting to see how you make this distinction in your own mind. Is it the DNA? The potential for what it may become? Or what? What makes it a human being with rights? And beyond that, rights that Trump the rights of others?

This is all well and good, and even interesting on some points.....b...u..t...you yourself still have not defined personhood or how such a definition is inextricably linked to "life" inasmuch as one is afforded legal protection - or even moral protection.

[_EAllusion]

"personhood" isn't a right.

Personhood both in philosophy and law refers to status a living being has that qualifies them for rights and protections associated with personhood.

[_subgenius]

"personhood" isn't a right.

Personhood both in philosophy and law refers to status a living being has that qualifies them for rights and protections associated with personhood.

circular much?

[_Themis]

Help. I have read the response by subgenius a couple of times, and I can't locate a clear proposition or question.

Can someone help me to understand what he is saying?

Subbie is one of the biggest trolls I have seen online. He avoids discussion and uses a lot of words without making a cogent point. You will notice he still has not even given his definition of person-hood.

[_honorentheos]

you yourself still have not defined personhood or how such a definition is inextricably linked to "life" inasmuch as one is afforded legal protection - or even moral protection.

How one defines what constitutes personhood affects everything that follows. That's why I asked you to provide what you believe constitutes personhood since it is fundamental to the discussion regarding whether or not a person is being consistent in how they seek to see rights applied. You claimed liberals aren't consistent, so the place to begin with that is sharing your definition of personhood that supports that claim.

As to whether or not it is inextricably linked to life is a very philosophical point between varying theories on what constitutes personhood. For example, would you agree that a self-learning and aware A.I. has personhood? Maybe you wouldn't but I would hope the example shows that it isn't synonymous with life. Unless, for you, the qualities of the two overlap perfectly. In which case, feel free to share what you think those qualities are.

[_Chap]

Help. I have read the response by subgenius a couple of times, and I can't locate a clear proposition or question.

then move along, because there is no reason for your post here - other than your own masturbatory urges.

I think that subgenius is perhaps flattering himself ...

[_Some Schmo]

I'm not sure personhood ever began for subbie. I suspect he's still a puppet waiting to be made into a real boy. It's just taking a very long time because this puppet can't seem to stop lying, and he clearly likes having his strings pulled.

[_subgenius]

I'm not sure personhood ever began for subbie. I suspect he's still a puppet waiting to be made into a real boy. It's just taking a very long time because this puppet can't seem to stop lying, and he clearly likes having his strings pulled.

You realize that the puppet is the hero in that story...so, thanks ya wannabe Mangiafuoco!