[hocndoc]

No, if you follow the conversation, I was making the point that self-awareness (or "knowing you're alive") is not necessary for a human to be a person, even under our current laws, and the problem with trying to call on sentience as a necessary criteria for the right to life - or the right not to be killed - of a human.

[beavus]

No, if you follow the conversation, I was making the point that self-awareness (or "knowing you're alive") is not necessary for a human to be a person, even under our current laws, and the problem with trying to call on sentience as a necessary criteria for the right to life - or the right not to be killed - of a human.

Okay. It's not that you are saying self-awareness isn't sufficient, you're saying that it isn't even necessary? Rights exist in the absence of any self-awareness?

So how can we tell if a thing has rights?