« The chinese room argument | Main | DNA vaccines »

29 April 2007



Clearly, like any sane individual, I agree with your support for option 1. I think the terms used are particularly important, though. The choices people make over the terms used to refer to their groups are not really "odd" so much as exercises in propaganda. Really we should be using terms like "pro-birth" rather than allowing the "pro-life" group to maintain a stranglehold on a perceived moral peak thanks to the abuse of a loosely defined but emotionally demanding term.


Back in my home we always refered to the "pro-lifers" as "anti-choice." There are a lot of them.

Harald Helfgott

I concur - 1 is the only sensible option. Still - why should the killing of a newborn be consider equal to the killing of an adult? A human newborn is much less intelligent than an adult gorilla. (I am not implying that it is necessarily a good idea to give a lesser penalty for an infanticide than for the killing of an adult; that is a different matter.)

Barnaby Dawson

I disagree. A human newborn learns at an incredible rate. I would say that a human newborn begins to apply its knowledge much later on in life than a newborn gorilla. This however, is better allowing more learning to occur before the attitudes and ideas get too fixed.

The comments to this entry are closed.