human rights

This category contains 19 posts

>More equal or less?

>A self-defined troll, Siricou Raven, asks, Merely being human genetically isn’t enough – so what do humans have that makes them protected over all other species? And when do they aquire whatever this is? SR, I don’t have to weigh, measure and evaluate – you do. You are the one asserting that “being human genetically … Continue reading

Frankenbunnies, non-brain dead organ donation, cloning, and PVS guinea pigs

Isn’t it amazing how many of the most controversial news and public policy issues revolve around bioethics and medicine? I’ve noted before that all of the controversies (like those mentioned above, from the days surrounding the weekend of October 8-9, 2006) are actually only one: which humans will receive society’s protection of the inalienable right … Continue reading

The fatherhood question

Kevin T. Kevin questions my post concerning the rights of fathers to choose to be fathers or not to be fathers. Irony was the point, Kevin. There definitely is no child for hours to days after ejaculation. There’s not even an embryo or fetus. Where is the logic in determining the “personhood” based on one … Continue reading

More on ethics guidelines on stem cell research

Just noticed that the Hinxton panel that decided to come to a consensus on what to do with human embryos, but ignored the very nature of human embryos themselves, included Julian Savulescu. The Oxford ethics professor is the author of a piece in the British Medical Journal (sorry, subscription only) in which he stated that, … Continue reading

How human is human-enough?

A group of very well respected scientists, philosophers and ethicists (all involved in bioethics and stem cell research) have joined together to discuss and draft what they call a “consensus” on stem cell research, both destructive embryonic stem cell research and non-destructive, ethical non-embryonic stem cell research. The document can be accessed at the Berman … Continue reading

The grown-ups speak for the smallest humans

Two of the most brilliant ethicists in the United States have answered one of the most partisan. Robert P. George and Gilbert Meilander, in the National Review On Line, have answered Michael Gazzaniga’s New York Times discussion on embryonic stem cell research. You’ll remember that Gazzaniga’s editorial, published in the NYT last week, called for … Continue reading

>What kind of world do we want to live in?

>A most appropriate question on this day, when the Supreme Court ruled that Oregon’s laws allowing physicians to write prescriptions intended to cause the death of patients. This time, the question is asked by Kathryn Hinsch,the founder of the Womens Bioethics Project, in her “guest column” in the Seattle Post Intelligencer. The subject of the … Continue reading

Professor Chooses to Deny Free Will (at Cornell)

This is not a religious blog, although I would never deny my faith or that my world view is strongly influenced by the fact that I’m a Christian. I just believe that the big Truths are pretty evident, even for those without faith. This is the heart of ethics: there are rights and wrongs, “yeses” … Continue reading

Backlash hurts (Fetal Pain article)

The fact that the editor in chief, Catherine D. DeAngelis, of the Journal of the American Medical Association is receiving outraged emails is news. (And, they’re mean and hateful, too, depending on how you define “hateful” doesn’t it?) After the AMA had to reverse its stand on harvesting organs from still living anencephalic babies in … Continue reading

If the post is missing: take the “www.” out of the url

@bnuckols Twitter