Blog 5 


How did the second contemporary issue effect your principles? Are you better able to see areas where your principles need adjusting? What adjustments need to be made? Which philosopher's position was least consistent with your own principles and why?


This topic actually did affect my principles. I am against abortion when it is used as a method of birth control and I do believe that an unborn fetus has the same rights as a the women that has the choice to abort the child. I do see the points that Warren makes about the fetus being dependent on the mother but that does not remove all rights from the child to have life. You can give the child up for adoption to a couple being gay or straight that can not have a child and would be more than happy to raise that child. I think that abortion should be the last option no the first. But at the same time I feel that the government should not force women into having a child that they do not want. The option should always be there even I disagree with it. 


Warren position was lease consistent with my principles I think that she is taking value away from human life that is in the making and is only saying we are humans once we are born. But she is forgetting that we were all fetus' at one point which and it was not through birth that we became human but through at the time we are conceived. I think that her views are very extreme and do not give the fetus any right. I think that she does not value life at all and the woman's choice whether she this life or she is forgetting that which in that woman's womb is life the greatest gift that we can ever have and it should looked at closer than just a choice. 


i commented on : http://lovelydreamer01.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html#comment-form
and http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/2012/04/my-blog-5.html#comment-form

Blog 4 
How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?


The first part of the blog is hard to answer because I never had asked myself what I though in regards in human cloning and even now after thinking about it I dont think that human goes against my principles my I do think that is merely ego driven and has no really useful purpose some people might say oh, but I would want to use thier organs in case I need them. Well, that sentence alone shows the value you have to another human life. To me personally cloning is very much like having children and they like ur clone should not be treated as property just because the are a part of you. 


It challenged my principles in the sense that I that believe that cloning is breaking up or playing with the natural way of us humans to procreate. We also need to find a way to make things faster, bigger, better. These are only better to me when they are used for spiritual growth and relieve pain and illness these ambitions are directed toward the wrong target. 


I agrees with Kass' principal extermination of genetic disease would be the only benefit to me for cloning but this alone does not justify the long term effects it could on the clone themselves and the effects it could on humanity. We would not need the opposite sex. Family structure could become extinct, leading to problems that we would not know how to handle. If children that come from single parent homes struggle more imagine coming from a single parent home and being a clone. How we would be equipped to counsel or guide those children if you are not a clone yourself, we could never fully understand. 


Kass's was more consistent with my principles. I believe that having children naturally and trying to conserve the little structure and value society puts on family today should be bigger goal than trying to have copies of ourselves all over the world.  


I commented on
http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com and http://bunchoblogs.blogspot.com