Re: Dr. Dobson

From: Glenn Morton <>
Date: Wed Aug 10 2005 - 07:02:19 EDT

Burgy, I am very uncomfortable with the concept that humans get to pick when and where the soul comes into existence. A 2 day old baby is not significantly further advanced than a 2-day pre-birth baby and I have heard people say that the soul doesn't come into existence until several months after birth. Thus, if that is the place we god-like humans place the soul's existence, then infanticide is fine and dandy.
Some have said that until one begins speaking one can't have a soul attributed to them. But what does one do with my 11 month old granddaughter who has been taught the sign language sign for please and uses it repeatedly to get cherios and other tasty treats even though she has no vocal language? She also understands the sign for all finished.
Burgy, humans aren't smart enough to pick where the sould comes into the human species.

Carol or John Burgeson <> wrote:
George wrote: "Clearly not since "soul" isn't a concept in the natural
sciences. Similarly for "person." & for the same reason there are no
scientific arguments that
support claims that John Burgeson or George Murphy have souls or are

That's far too easy an answer, George. There ARE scientific arguments
which logically argue (persuasive, to me) that IF souls and personhood
are real things, then an early embryo cannot possess either. I am
unwilling to say that there are NO arguments on the other side.

Perhaps I should reword the question. Making the assumption that at least
some people, including Murphy, Burgeson and the people on this list,
possess (or ARE) souls, is there any evidence that suggests when these
souls came into existence -- in particular, is there any evidence that
suggests they came into existence during the hour or so conception took


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Received on Wed Aug 10 07:03:16 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 10 2005 - 07:03:17 EDT