From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Genetic code != entire sum of the individual
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:50:13 GMT

No, I'm not following up my own post; I got a letter from Martin
Guerrero asking me to post this.  Anybody responding, *please* replace
my name and address with his or otherwise make it clear that he wrote
the following.

--- --- ---

From: Martin Guerrero <martyg@ocf.Berkeley.EDU>
Message-Id: <199208311904.AA15956@plague.berkeley.edu>
To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu

In article <1992Aug30.170617.22907@midway.uchicago.edu>
eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <17qs7eINNqlb@agate.berkeley.edu>
>martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug30.011352.29396@midway.uchicago.edu>
>>eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>In article <17mtmvINNear@agate.berkeley.edu>
>>>martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>
>>>>In addition, the ENTIRE individual is defined at conception.  The mother's 
>>>>traits and the father's traits combine to create a new DNA structure
>>>>which equates to a new and unique human being.  Abort the unborn and
>>>>you will never see that combination again.
>
>>>Oh, please!  Yes, the genetic code of the z/e/f is determined at
>>>conception, and yes, if the woman has an abortion there will never be
>>>another human with that genetic code (the chances are so low as to be
>>>nonexistent for all practical purposes).  But the entire individual is
>>>not, *not*, NOT defined by their genetic code.  This is why identical
>>>twins are different people.
>
>>But practically speaking, the genetic code of the unborn (whether twins
>>or not) is UNIQUE and separate from the mother.
>
>Well, yes.  So?  The genetic code of the mosquito I killed last night
>is unique and separate from mine.  A cancer's DNA is also unique.
>

Let's put that mosquito in a human mother's womb.  Let's watch it grow
to become a screaming, crying blob of cells at birth.

>And this isn't what you said above.
>
>>So this, hopefully, 
>>discounts the 'just an extension of the mother' justification.
>
>Oh, a z/e/f is an entity other than the pregnant woman.  Not really a
>separate entity, but siamese twins are two different but not separate
>entities, and certainly not just extentions of each other.  But the
>question is just what is the entity that is the z/e/f.  Human, yes.  A
>person?  IMO, not until its brain is fairly well developed.

At least we agree that a human can exist within the womb.
Let's work together on this.

How can you be a human and not a person?  

>
>>Simply put, before abortion there is life.  After, there is death.
>
>Hm.  Well, yes.  So?  Before a cow was killed for the steak I ate last
>night there was life.  Afterwards, there wasn't.  What of it?  We kill
>all of the time -- often we kill bacteria and viruses and parasites
>inside or body without even knowing it.  Does the fact that a z/e/f
>has human DNA demand different treatment?  Does what a z/e/f may
>become demand different treatment?  Why?

Earlier, you said that even the z/e/f is human.  Also, you say, so?
I'll leave the rest up to you.

--- --- ---

Martin will have to live with my .sig, tho.  :-)


-- 
Pro-Choice                 Anti-Roe                     - E. Elizabeth Bartley
            Abortions should be safe, legal, early, and rare.

Cthulhu for President -- when you're tired of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc