From: birge@guerciotti.EBay.Sun.COM (John Birge)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Good vs Bad (arguements)
Date: 22 Jan 1993 00:03:11 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: birge@guerciotti.EBay.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: guerciotti.ebay.sun.com

I don't seem to be making my point. Let me put it bluntly. I believe your 
position to be fallacious. One of my posts gave examples of other fallacious 
arguments and you called them logical (many fallacious arguments go to court). 
I then followed up with a rather lengthy diatribe on how people sometimes 
have different views of what constitutes a "Good Argument". You returned to 
your original line of reasoning. For me this is much like talking to a bible
thumper who quotes from the bible over and over in response to your assertion.
It's useless to argue.

>........The argument, as far as I can tell, is essentially as I indicated,
>and leads to the absurdity I originally indicated.
>
>That is the interesting part of this discussion. Perhaps you will
>address that.
>
>-Ekr

Okie Dokie....

See I don't buy your basic premise that a sperm/egg are the same as a 
zygote/embryo. However I'm sure you realize the Catholic Church agrees 
with that assertion. However they use the argument to reach a conclusion 
the exact opposite of yours. And I don't agree with them either. But a 
logical evaluation of your premise would go something like this (it's been 
18 or so years since I picked up a book on biology so you biologists 
be gentle with the flames).

You would agree that an individual is made up of X  number (23? or 
is that 23 pair equaling 46) of chromosomes containing the DNA that 
make us distinct individuals. You may also agree that neither of the 
gamete contain a complete set (or the catalyst) and therefore neither 
contain the unique genetic characteristics that make a unique individual. 
At the point of fertilization the pronucleus of the two gamete unite to 
complete this set of instructions thereby creating a unique set of 
instructions for the creation of a unique individual. Something like 
that anyway.  

Now as the above suggests the difference between an individual gamete 
and an embryo are vast. Thereby casting doubt on the basic logic of
your postulation that the logical extension of my premise leads to
an absurd conclusion.
 
My original post was suggesting that because theists believe that each 
individual is endowed with a soul that exists eternally, the body only
provides  a vessel for the soul. It is ironic that theists are the ones 
that abhor abortion when the time that the soul would reside in the
vessel would be incredibly short in terms of eternity (this ignores the
concepts of original sin). 

It follows that it is also ironic that an Atheist would not have a 
less tolerant view due to the belief that our bodies are all we have 
and therefore the destruction of the body or embryo is the end of an 
individual that can never repeat itself. 

However that assumes that an individual life has some inviolable right
to existence. Based on the input I've received this is not a given.

Got to go.

John

 
  
 




Xref: sparky alt.atheism:27149 sci.skeptic:22964