Posted on 02/27/2003 12:02:54 PM PST by MHGinTN
Murder is against the states' laws, not the federal government's. Is there even a federal law against murder of someone who is not a federal employee? There may not be.
Wait a minute - what is the difference between "an individual" and "a fetus"? Do you mean a fetus (i.e. unborn human) is not an individual - is it a group?
Does that mean that biotechnology can be engineered to suit your sentimentalities?
What do you mean by "sentimentalities" - my respect for the lives of all individual humans, no matter what stage of development, abilities, potential or imperfection?
So in your world view, human being's "sentiments" such as respect for life should be offered to the god of Absolute Scientific Progress? (What can be done, should be done?)
If the cloning happens on federal property, then you can ban this activity at the federal level. If not, then you can't. Totally parallel.
You didn't answer my question about the fetal homicide laws and how could it be homicide if your estimate of the unborn not being human beings is correct.
You are confusing me with someone else. I never said the unborn are not human beings. I agree that the unborn are human beings. My view is that the federal government has no authority to prohibit cloning. It has no authority to prohibit abortions. It has no authority to bring murder charges against a non-federal employee or a person killed on non-federal government owned land. The state governments can ban those things.
I suppose the fact that homicide presumes a human being was killed unlawfully doesn't matter?
It most certainly does matter -- but not to the federal government. They have no horse in this race. It DOES matter to the state governements. They can ban whatever is not forbidden to them to be banned by the constitution. They cannot ban political speech, free expression of religion, or anything else specifically mentioned in the constitution as being beyond the reach of state government laws. However, they can ban cloning, abortion*, or murder. And they have.
*The previous Supreme Court disagreed on this and the present one may have enough votes to overturn this rule. Certainly if Bush can appoint two more justices it will.
I don't know why you think you can read my mind and assume that I am "upset"...I just don't know which of my statements or questions you are calling "sentimentalities".
I was simply asking whether you sincerely opposed just a portion of biotechnology because of the fetal issue, or are you a Luddite and basically oppose all biotechnology?
Personally, I don't find the word "Luddite" an insult, but I am not ethically opposed to all biotechnology. I am 100% opposed to the taking of any lives to further any scientific research or treatments.
End the life of the embryo and you may presume you've ended the later ages of that individual's lifetime (and that is EXACTLY what the serial killer supporters presume they have a right to do, kill the very young to avoid the young growing into their natural later ages) ... else why do the pro-baby-slaughter advocates want to 'get them as early as possible'?
Every time someone chooses abortion to end their inconvenience, or to set aside responsibility for their behaviors, or to avoid the consequences of earlier choice, that person affirms the truth that the earliest age of a human being's lifetime is connected inextricably to later ages unless purposed termination is done (purposeful killing is done) ... unless they kill the vulnerable early aged individual human being, that being will reach the later ages of its lifetime. THAT is the truth of abortion thinking! They know the truth but choose to believe a lie or a field of lies because the lie(s) serves their selfish ends. Sadly, their selfishness relies on killing of an already alive very young individual human being to serve their older liberty. Embryonic stem cell harvesting and exploitation, and 'research cloning' do the exact same thing, but the cloners will tell the public that their conceptions and killings deal with 'pre-embryos' ... a new obfuscatory term (read bold-faced LIE) designed to instantly dehumanize the severly handicapped embryos these ghouls conceive in vitro.
The promoters and champions of the abortion holocaust must seek to cancel the truth in order to enlist others to their putrified castle of lies. That's why they use terms like 'reproductive rights', at once foisting the lie that an already alive but very young individual human being is of less human value than an older human being, foisting the lie that killing alive young is somehow reproductive and to be viewed as a valid choice! The so called 'research cloners' and embryonic stem cell exploiters use the same false dehuamnization of 'choice'. It's all about 'choice' all right, the choice to believe and further lies for the convenience of killing to avoid consequences or to conceive and kill non-implanted individual human embryonic humans for their utilitarian value!
The reason the abortion champions and cloning champions are seeking earlier and earlier ways to dehumanize the earliest ages of individual lifetimes is directly related to the truth they know down deep, that an individual human being begins their lifetime at conception and if someone doesn't purposely kill that individual early on, the natural later ages of the individual's lifetime will very likely come about. If the cloners can erase the humanity of the earliest ages along the lifetime continuum, they will have unfettered access to conceive and exploit individual human lives. They will have succeeded in institutionalizing cannibalism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.