Antichristus: Within the parameters of 21st century medical advances, there is no such thing as someone who is 'completely mad' - not when they're put on medication regime(s). In milieu where there is no adequate medical care, such a person would still be capable of acting, albeit on the basis of irrational thought. Evidently, they're still in possession of thoughts (even if irrational) and actions. Therefore, they are, together with those suffering from total amnesia, still humans but not persons. I use these terms as construed in analytic and legal philosophy (Read it up; we're now living in a communication age).
Day old babies have thoughts (brains working perfectly hence they cry [i.e. act] when hungry or when in discomfort because that's the only way they can communicate.
What can you say about kicking babies ....some react to a familiar voice or touch then the tend to kick Inside...is that not sign enough?
BluntBoy: That was why the Northerners revolted in 2011 because they felt cheated. Now, they will use 8 complete years and will pass it to the Yorubas. This will continue until the Igbos learn how to play politics well.
So tinubu obasanjo and amaechi are from the north? Wow Afonja I can see ur ready to vote for the Daura President that insults the youth of this country on a foreign soil for that mattter
BluntBoy: Since 1999, to balance power between the North and South. So far, Igbos have been playing politics badly, hence, the Yorubas and the South South ably representing the South zone.
Rubbish goodluck became president by chance nothing to do with zoning...after obasanjo spent 8years how many did a northerner spent after that?
BluntBoy: Look at this illiterate. Power is zoned in Nigeria. By 2023, the North would have completed 8 years and another zone would be gunning for the top post.
You are here calling Afonjas but you do not know that Yorubas and the North play politics well. If Igbos continue to play politics of hate, they will never produce a president till Christ comes.
Shey papilo wan comot for president? If ah slap him ehn...so football money never do am Lazy youths ti take over Buhari and daura 2019 is guaranteed as thermocool guarantee
ceeroh: My fellow nairalanders, I'm in a dilemma at the moment. I presently work in a small company (one man business) with a ridiculously low pay, I can't even afford to save, no defined job description; I run all sorts of errands and yet, I still remain committed. And my boss, he never appreciates whatever you do, uses you as if you're not human, a chronic micromanager. So I wake up every morning feeling depressed and demotivated. But una know na, if I don't work, hunger will wire me and Bubu will call me lazy. So recently, I went for an interview and I think I did well cos I was asked to come back tomorrow. During the course of the interview, the salary was mentioned and it's more than what I earn presently but the office is on the Island while I live on the mainland. So the t.fare will be much, even as high as what I earn at the moment. Which means I'll have little or nothing left with me after all the monthly expenses. Now, I was asked to come tomorrow... should I go and hear what they wanna say? If the offer remains the same, should I reject or accept? I'm confused. And I'm so so tired of my present job. No zeal, no motivation, nothing whatsoever.
Please push this to FP, I have less than 24hours to decide.
Antichristus: Your response presented in syllogistic fashion lured me to respond, giving its apparent rather not real logic which I intend to interrogate. However, the reference to a text which derives from Ancient Mesopotamian Folklore is intriguing because on all accounts you're alluding to an unverifiable truth-claim. That said, the philosophical understanding of personhood is contingent on two things: 'thought' and 'action'. This implies that a person lost their personhood if they're incapable of: (a) thinking; and (b) acting. On this account, abortion, like euthanasia is morally permissible. To this end, my counterargument, syllogistically presented, goes thus:
Premise #1: Personhood is contingent on 'thought' and 'action'; Premise #2: A feotus is incapable of thinking and acting; Premise #3: A feotus, lacking the ability and the capacity to think and act is not yet a person. Conclusion: Therefore, it is morally permissible to terminate a feotus.
Further to the above, there are other circumstantial cases which makes abortion morally permissible. These include: serious feotal abnormality or deformity; pregnancy resulting from incest and/or rape; and, where the woman risks losing her life due to the pregnancy.
Are u saying that someone that is completely mad or is suffering from total amnesia is not worthy to be considered a human being? Secondly can a one day old baby think ?
Abortion is not a sin; where in the Bible was it quoted?
If abortion is a sin, plastic surgery should also be.
the unborn are called children. Luke 1:41 states, “When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit (1:44).”
Premise #1: It is wrong to murder a person. Premise #2: The unborn is a person. Conclusion: Therefore, it is wrong to murder the unborn.
. Exodus 21:22-23 states, “If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life . . . " This strongly indicates that the Mosaic Law viewed the unborn as persons worthy of the same protection and rights as adults.