171 replies to this topic

[shadowhawk]

 

Without you dehumanizing some stage of life based upon your subjective whim, tell me when human life begins and ends. 

 

My subjective whim is mine, but also is beneficary for all people. I don't need spare parts (at least not yet). There are many people, who need currently. If we are to be immortal, we all will need spare organs in the future.

 

Purely biologically the life of the human lasts from the zygote to the death. 

 

The human life that maters - from the brain starts working until the last electromagnetic activity of the brain.

 

If you don't allow the human cloning for organs, do you allow it as a technology for eventual protecting and proceeding the human race? If the clone remains alive, it seems, that your main argument becomes invalid, right? How about cloning people, who remained without a child in order to proceed their ofspring? Here again your main argument stops working - the clone is alive again.

 

It matters only to you but not to those who die.  You live only because you dehumanize others so you can rob their body parts.  Nothing in Biology backs up your values and reasoning.

[Danail Bulgaria]

So, the existence of spare organs does matter only to me, who doesn't need spare parts currently, and absolutely doesn't matter to those, who die, because they don't get organs for transplantation. This is what I call logic. To inform you a bit: It is absolutely the oposite. Those, who today wait in the list for transplantation have a very big wish - to "dehumanize others so" to "rob their body parts" just as you are saying it. They very often turn to the black market, where body parts are being sold.

 

Explain which of my values and reasoning are not backed up in biology and why.

[shadowhawk]

I am not against spare organs, as long as you don't have to kill someone to get them.  Yes the black market sells body parts often taken by force from poor people.  It is quite horrific.  Biology knows that a complete human life starts at conception and ends with death.  It develops and changes throughout its existence.  Period.  You and your value system, which are not based upon science, want to steal  body parts from the weak and defenseless bu dehumanizing them based n the fact they are changing in their life.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Do you have some option for getting genetically identical to you organs, instead of cloning?

 

If a cloned embryo would not exist anyway, why not sacrificing it? Is it only your life preservation view? Or there is something else? I heard, that some people think, that you are wasting the soul of some one else, soul or you are wasting one incarnation try.

[shadowhawk]

Clones are separate beings and are not you.

[Danail Bulgaria]

And if you have to decide between you and your clone, who will you choose?

[serp777]

 

 

Without you dehumanizing some stage of life based upon your subjective whim, tell me when human life begins and ends. 

 

My subjective whim is mine, but also is beneficary for all people. I don't need spare parts (at least not yet). There are many people, who need currently. If we are to be immortal, we all will need spare organs in the future.

 

Purely biologically the life of the human lasts from the zygote to the death. 

 

The human life that maters - from the brain starts working until the last electromagnetic activity of the brain.

 

If you don't allow the human cloning for organs, do you allow it as a technology for eventual protecting and proceeding the human race? If the clone remains alive, it seems, that your main argument becomes invalid, right? How about cloning people, who remained without a child in order to proceed their ofspring? Here again your main argument stops working - the clone is alive again.

 

It matters only to you but not to those who die.  You live only because you dehumanize others so you can rob their body parts.  Nothing in Biology backs up your values and reasoning.

 

 

Biology doesn't have moral values. Its not a person or an ideology. Biology doesn't back up any values.

 

Again you don't value human life because its human. You would support decades of medical ethics where a brain dead person is allowed to die because it would be cost prohibative to keep the body alive for absolutely no reason.

 

As long as the cloned human or embryo doesn't have a sufficient brain, then its not morally questionable. Biology and neuroscience backs up the reasoning that it is the brain that determines our consciousness. Without a brain or a developed brain, then the person is essentially a living corpse. If the body has no consciousness then killing it for organs doesn't hurt anyone--all it does it save lives for those who do have established consciousnesses. I don't see why you get to determine, against neuro science, that the basis for human existence isn't the brain. If you could somehow suspend a brain without a body, it would be infinitely more valuable then the empty body because the brain has what you would call "the soul."
 

[shadowhawk]

Human life that matters?  To whom?  Where have we heard this kind of talk before?  This value judgement does not come from the biology or science. 

[shadowhawk]

And if you have to decide between you and your clone, who will you choose?

I don't have to decide and that does not justify killing anyone.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Sooner or later you may have to decide - for example you may start to need a new kidney, or a new heart. Then, how will you obtain them? Maybe on the usual procedure, if you have an extraordinary luck, or of you have enough time to wait. Imagine the situation - you are in a need of a new kidney, because your both kidneys are with chronic malfunction, crammed with kidney stones, and some pyelonephritis. What will you do? You have options to choose in the real world - 1. not to do nothing and wait to see if there is actually a God; 2. going for dialysis, thus elongating a bit your suffering for the cost of the much greater chance of getting hepatitis c or hiv; 3. Wait on the list for transplantations - here you may be lucky, or may try to barb some doctors to be tickled upper in the list, but nevertheless you will have the bigger chance of dying; 4. To go to the black market and transplant your kidney taken from alive and healthy human - absolutely against your ideals; and if the technology is working in the future, when you will need a kidney - to savagely take a poor skin cell of yours, making the sin of turning it into an embryo, then harvest the kidney from the poor embryo. These are the options, that I know of. Do you know more? If no, then which one will you choose? Please answer.

[serp777]

Human life that matters?  To whom?  Where have we heard this kind of talk before?  This value judgement does not come from the biology or science. 

 

It doesn't come from you or your particular interpretation of God and the bible either. We've heard your kind of talk in the crusades or in the suicide bombing community where religious people think they know objective morals, which are really subjective and relative because it depends on their subjective interpretation.

[shadowhawk]

Well since in your view there is no morality I WILL TAKE YOUR KIDNEY AND HEART.  In the view of Biology the kidney and heart belongs to another and not me.

[Danail Bulgaria]

lol how about if we appear to be genetically incompatable, and you die?

[shadowhawk]

Well you see what kinds of ethical issues this raises.

[shadowhawk]

 

Human life that matters?  To whom?  Where have we heard this kind of talk before?  This value judgement does not come from the biology or science. 

 

It doesn't come from you or your particular interpretation of God and the bible either. We've heard your kind of talk in the crusades or in the suicide bombing community where religious people think they know objective morals, which are really subjective and relative because it depends on their subjective interpretation.

 

 

That is my point.  I did not use any religious reference.  As for your bigoted talk, if you want to talk about the crusades, I would be happy to.  I just posted a history of what led up to the crusades in Evidence for Islam.  I would also be happy to talk about morality but we do not have a topic yet.
 

[shadowhawk]

GET YOUR BODY PARTS HERE!

 

http://libertynewsno...rror/article937

 

 

[Danail Bulgaria]

Well you see what kinds of ethical issues this raises.

 

And you keep not answering my question - what would you do in a case like that, I wrote above - if you need a kidney to be transplanted?

[shadowhawk]

I would not take yours unless you gave it to me.

[Danail Bulgaria]

And if no one compatible to you gives it? E.g. if you wait already for a long time in the transplantation lists?

[shadowhawk]

Then someone will (might) die and it may be me.

[Danail Bulgaria]

GET YOUR BODY PARTS HERE!

 

http://libertynewsno...rror/article937

 

Don't you think, that If you develop the cloned organs technologies, you will stop this strategy for funding terrorism?
 

[shadowhawk]

If there is no God, one persons morality is as good as the next.

[Danail Bulgaria]

And if there is God, then we must not develop cloned organs and die as flies.

 

What of these both is better is the question.

[shadowhawk]

No, you are not a fly so you could never die like one.  You have no right to kill someone else to harvest body parts for your own selfish ends.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Lol Alright. Then these are the two options:

 

To die as a human, who needs an organ for transplantation,

 

or not to die, but to develop the cloned organs strategy and to kill embryos.

 

The question is which of these two is better.

 

[shadowhawk]

Which is better, for one human life to die in need of a transplant or for another human life to die as a result of their organs being harvested?  Answer, thou shall not kill.  Neither is good.

[Danail Bulgaria]

From your point of view, lets hope, that 3D printing will allow printing of organs microstructure soon.

[shadowhawk]

Lets hope no one wh believes in killing for body parts ever gets in control as well.

[serp777]

Lets hope no one wh believes in killing for body parts ever gets in control as well.

 

LEts hope some inefficient idealist wouldn't let humans die for a fetus that wont develop into a human anyways due to some confounding and contradictory ethics.

[shadowhawk]

Well  Christians don't get life in your view so they must not be human either.  How about blacks?  They defined them as not human before.  How about old people, do they ever become non human?