|
January 20, 2005
Personhood:
It Comes Naturally
by Dan Kennedy
To say that a single-celled human being at
conception is no larger than the dot at the end of
this sentence is to simply give a description based
on appearance. It is not an explanation or
definition of what this human being is.
Aristotle 2400 years ago noted that to obtain a
true definition of what something is, you must
discover what its powers are and what it is meant
to be. To judge by appearance alone is both
ignorant and perilous. Genocide, slavery, ethnic
cleansing - history offers abundant witness to the
brutal injustice that inevitably results from
arbitrary judgments.
At conception each of us becomes a
self-possessed human person. We possess our own
future; it belongs to us uniquely and no one else.
No matter our size, present within us at conception
is the complete design of what we are meant to be
and a guiding force or impetus that brings that
development about. This power and the information
necessary to direct it must be present at
conception in order for development to occur.
Personhood is not dependent on whether one is
currently manifesting all one's powers or not. It
is not a temporary state that comes and goes with
our degree of functionality. A machine could
conceivably be designed to look like us, and mimic
numerous human traits, but functional mimicry is
not personhood. Indeed, there are already machines
that actually function more efficiently than we do
at specific tasks, but I seriously doubt your
vacuum cleaner ever wonders about the fairness of
it all.
You, however, are intrinsically oriented toward
that unique human characteristic, evident even in
young children, to desire and reflect on
transcendent realities like justice and truth. Our
dignity at conception is often obscured by labels
assigned to stages of development such as zygote,
blastocyst, fetus, or infant. But, an embryo is not
less of a human being than an infant, anymore than
a child is less of a human being before puberty
than after. At every stage we are whole human
beings.
This problem with labels is not new. In fact,
Abraham Lincoln used to illustrate it by humorously
asking how many legs does a dog have if you call
the tail a leg? The answer is four, because it
makes no difference if you call it a leg, it is
still a tail. In the same way, how we label a stage
of development doesn't change the fundamental
nature or reality of that which we label.
Tragically, language has often been engineered
for the very purpose of dehumanizing those who are
different, who don't look like us, or those
targeted for exploitation. Nor does the inability
to perceive personhood in others serve as proof
that it must not be present. One's own lack of
clarity does not alter objective reality.
Ironically, those who would deny personhood
under these circumstances, fancy themselves more
sophisticated than their historical counterparts,
who condoned atrocities based on appearance.
However, they display the same shallow mentality
when it comes to contemporary debates. Once again
we witness ignorance and utilitarian motives
corrupting what is both rationally and morally
obvious, that we can not earn for ourselves, or
bestow on others what is already ours by
nature.
Our culture's eclipse of reason has resulted in
untold suffering and a relentless violation of
inalienable rights. The unborn, the elderly, the
disabled are all targets of these self-appointed
final arbiters of personhood. Inevitably, none of
us are immune from their arbitrary judgments.
Healing the culture must begin with acknowledging
that at conception, a unique, self-possessed human
person comes into being. Their future, as well as
ours, depends on it.
Dan Kennedy is the chief executive officer of
Human Life of Washington. This organization is the
affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee
in Washington state. See: http://www.humanlife.net
and http://www.lifeprinciples.net.
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy
Magazine...
Academy
Showcase
Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|