The value of life is at the core of almost any argument about abortion, euthanasia, suicide etc. But: Life is. And like any natural manifestation LIFE doesn’t have any moral significance.
-
Life is no value100% Voted for by 5th position Gb, ohsweetie2788, fodorm, happysassycassie.
I define LIFE as any life and the sum of all lives; a natural manifestation without moral significance. All living beings live by feeding on other living beings. As such LIFE is self-reproducing and self-consuming. Therefore the value of life cannot function as argument in the debate on any of the critical moral issues such as euthanasia or abortion.
Adding your reply:
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
June 15, 2005
I define .............
......... 'life' simply as "that which has the capacity to die." As to the value of life as it pertains to the issue of abortion etc., it seems to me; the stock you put into whatever point of view you have determines your belief in the so called sanctity of life. More often than not pro lifers can be exposed as hippocritical with a 'not to deep' examination.June 29, 2005
Edit | Reply
I define ....
Nice try .... but how would you define death? Is being alive a "value"? a fundamental one?June 15, 2005
Edit | Reply
I totally agree
Life exists only 'to be'. The only thing that would be affected by the absence of life is other lives which also exist only for the sake of existing...September 5, 2005
Edit | Reply
Life
There's a difference between what is life and what is a living being. Our heart, liver and kidneys are life but they are not living. They exist but they don't know that they exist. Otherwise having a kidney taken out, we would be either burying or cremating it.Please register or login to comment! It's totally free