[clue-talk] How do CLUEbies vote?

[David L. Willson]

> Sorry, David, but that question is not illustrative of anything. Until a baby
> is born, it only has the potential to be a person. What if the baby is
> stillborn? What if the woman miscarries? What if the mother's health is in
> danger? These are all questions that are illustrative of the argument.

Why is the unborn not a person?  What's the thing that makes you a
person, and him not?  I addressed the case where Mom's life is in danger
in my last post.

> > country by reducing or eliminating other indigent classes, not just the
> > unborn?  There are a good number of people with no regard for the
> > homeless and hungry, perhaps we could start a Soylent Green initiative.
> > Hey, that reminds me of embryonic stem-cell testing.  Someone wiser than
> > I am will have to explain the significant difference to me.
> 
> As I stated above, discussions about abortion apparently cannot remain
> rational.

Do tell.  At what point did I become irrational?  Emotional, yes, and
justifiably so, but not irrational.

You, on the other hand, didn't describe the difference between a Soylent
Green initiative and embryonic stem cell testing.  Let me throw in the
words "federally funded", just to complete the analogue.  And then
re-submit my question:  What is the significant difference?