"Personhood", according to most people, is the state of being a "person". If that's the case, then we need to know what is entailed in being a "person"! It is said by progressives that a "person" is a "being SUCH AS a human". What other being could even be considered a person? Many progressives at the present are attempting to assign personhood to other intelligent animals such as the porpoise.
From a Judeo-Christian standpoint we know that two "persons" were created by God. We call them "man" and "woman", and they are referred to as "people". The male of the species has dominion over everything. Also, his assigned role is to tend to the Garden. Hers is to beget children and nourish them. Together these "persons" were to procreate to propagate their kind.
What mostly sets people apart as "persons" is that they wee created in the image of God. Not only do they have a flesh, but they have a container for spirit called "the soul" and a "mind" to reason and choose. Although people have instincts, their minds go through complicated thought processes. They just don't react to stimuli! We don't know of any other animal which feels the emotion of guilt and takes measures to rid themselves of depressed feelings caused by doing wrong to the standards of those around them or to a deity.
The mind is "the part of a person that thinks, reasons, feels, and remembers." according to Meriam-Webster Dictionary. Since the definition includes only "a person", then having a "mind" defines personhood. That's different than having a brain. Most animals have some type of central control system, but only man can use it for all the uses of thinking, reasoning, being emotional and remembering.
Although Judeo-Christians assign emotions, reason, a mind. and mental choices to God's creation, that does not preclude that these characteristics are scientific as well! Philosophy and theology can share theories, and yet those theories are not discreet from each either. The biggest difference is that Christians believe in the "soul" as a spiritual entity as do Jews, but philosophers believe it to be no more than a "moral compass" for guiding the emotions! Either way, "persons" have a soul; other animals do not!
With a spiritual soul people have hope in eternal life. With a mere moral soul, people can only have hope in this existence. Hence, the philosophical concept of soul is deterministic. "Persons" can have hope or fatalism, animals cannot!
Being a "person" and consequently holding the status of "personhood" implies a person has a personality! "Personality" is all the traits that make individuals unique. There are no two people alike, not even identical twins! Let me ask you a question: "Is personality bestowed at birth or did it develop?"
Monitoring of the unborn indicates that personality develops over time in the womb. Nobody knows when it starts because it's hard to operationalize, but babies respond differently to stimuli in the womb and have shown different degrees of emotion. For normal development for all systems to support each other, they grow in proportion to each other in the womb. It is logical that the personality is a system and that it develops at the same rate as the other systems since they all complement each other!
"Gessel's Growth Gradients" indicate that "personality" is a system which is there at conception and develops along with the other systems. Hence, the embryo is human. It must have a personality since it's a system. The fetus has a personality. It can be seen in the womb! Embryos and fetuses are not some other being; they are persons! It would take a fool to deny that babies are born with very developed "personalities". As such those animals with "personalities" are "persons" and the status of them are "personhood". Hence, not only do full-term babies have personhood, but so do fetuses and embryos. Those premature babies which survive preterm births are born with personalities and with "personhood"!
I normally have much respect for Charles Krauthammer, but on The Factor the other evening, he argued with Bill "O'Reilly that fetuses are not persons because personhood wasn't there until birth. Charles, you have your psychobabble training showing through! Such shallow logic shows little regard to life! Those who make this argument violate the value of a person. Somehow it seems that a magic wand is waved while the fetus crawls through the birth canal and breaths air. That wand, according to them, changes them from a "thing" into a "person"! Houdini would be proud of Krauthammer. His magic is stronger than his!
Krauthammer, being a psychiatrist, should know what Gesell knew. I believe he did and ignores facts in favor of his own bias. Yes, scientists always have a bias. Their bias is concealed in their theories and never mentioned! My bias is that to be the most humane and civilized, fetuses need to be given the benefit of the doubt: they are persons and must be protected because with personhood comes the "right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Destroyed persons never enjoy these rights as promulgated not only in natural law, but in our Constitution!
No comments:
Post a Comment