From: Reason (reason@exratio.com)
Date: Thu Nov 14 2002 - 23:45:55 MST
---> Lee Corbin
> Reason writes
>
> > For the record, my stance on it all -- which should come through fairly
> > clearly once I'm done tinkering with text -- is that bioethics is:
> >
> > a) Irrelevant.
> > Everything that people are worried about when they think of medical
> > research is already covered by common laws on violence, theft
> and fraud. If
> > every bioethicist went on a permanent vacation tomorrow, there
> would be no
> > sudden outbreak of Nazi-style medical experimentation (as some
> people seem
> > to think). Everything that is informed and non-coercive is a
> simple private
> > contract between consenting adults and should be treated as such.
>
> Shocking. "Bioethics is irrelevant". I sure hope that I can't
> think of any counterexamples. What a great claim/insight!
<peers askance>
I'll take that as played straight, I think. Come on, I'm sure you can come
up with a few. All counterarguments welcomed.
Really, however obvious the above may be to some people, that particular
choir isn't the target audience.
> > b) A slow, stealthy assault against our lives
> > To my mind, there is little difference between shooting a
> healthy person,
> > and actively keeping the medicine away from a sick person who would
> > otherwise be able to obtain it. Most bioethicists advocate murder in my
> > eyes. On a vast, staggering scale in some cases. If Kass and
> Fukuyama were
> > Rulers of The World, the death tolls directly attributable to
> their reign
> > would beggar the imagination.
>
> As agitating as is your first sentence, I am gradually forced to agree.
Good :)
> > They are the worst form of human political beast; lying to slightly
> > improve their own comfort at huge cost to others, quite prepared to
> > dictate death to millions without blinking an eye, believing it is
> > right to be able to tell others what to do at gunpoint.
>
> Just where are they lying? I've looked into it about 1% of the degree
> to which you evidently have, but accusations of *lying* usually turn
> out to be exaggerated when there are deep philosophical or political
> differences, as is the case here.
Indeed. It's entirely possible that I project my understanding of the world
on these people, and find that (in my model) the only way their stance makes
sense is if they are lying through their teeth to justify irrational
prejudices. OTOH, I think this is a fair assumption to make of anyone who
has worked his or her way into a politicized position. And add "for personal
gain" in there too.
Reason
http://www.exratio.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:07 MST