[Vision2020] A Frozen Embryo Responds to its Subpoena

[Nick Gier]

Greetings:

Even though this post shows up in the archives, I did not get my own e-mail 
copy of it.  Did you guys? Even if you've seen this before, it gives me a 
chance to correct a typo in the title.  Except for Carl, I don't think most 
of us pronounce the "b" in subpoena.

A FROZEN EMBRYO RESPONDS TO ITS SUBPOENA
WITH SUPPORT FOR MICHAEL SCHIAVO

By Nick Gier
Professor Emeritus of Philosophy
University of Idaho

         To: Tom DeLay, U. S. House of Representatives

         Thank you for your kind summons, but I am unable to attend for the 
following reasons.
First, although I am biologically a human being, I am not a legal person under
English Common Law or any other law of which I am aware.  In fact, if 
thawed out, I might decide to become a twin, at which point my genetic 
identity, which some people mistakenly believe makes me a person, makes me 
two potential persons before the law rather than one.  My twin and I would 
have the same genetic identity but not the same moral and legal identity.
         Second, if you would review your history, you would learn that our 
moral, religious, and legal tradition holds that a person is a rational 
being, which does not happen until late in my fetal development. In fact, 
the ancient Jews and English jurist Sir Edward Coke believed that I am not 
a person until I am born alive.  The great Catholic theologian Thomas 
Aquinas maintained that God does not make me a person until late in 
pregnancy--"the completion of [my] coming into being."
Following Aquinas, Catholic philosopher Jaques Maritain states: "To admit 
that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its 
conception, when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a 
philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."
Protestants have joined Catholics in defining a person as one created in 
the "image of God." Paul Jewett of conservative Fuller Theological Seminary 
states that the image of God "defines . . . a person, an individual that is 
free and self-conscious, and a rational, moral, and religious agent . . . . 
"  I wish I could claim such a valuable status, but I have to agree with 
these fine theologians and wait for the proper time.
Excuse me for being so philosophical, but I also have to add another 
important distinction.  Starting at the third trimester, I would be a 
fetus-child with a serious moral right to life, but have no duties.  I 
would not be an adult person with rights and duties, the sort that Jewett 
describes, until I reach the age of majority.
         I simply do not understand why the Supreme Court justices did not 
use this solid tradition for their decision in 1973.  Instead, they used 
fetal viability as a standard, one which is gradually being pushed back by 
technology and one which does not make a moral difference between viable 
animal and human fetuses.  A close reading of their footnotes reveals that 
they knew about Coke, the Jews, and Aquinas, and they should have ruled on 
that basis.
         For me a rational being is one whose mental life is qualitatively 
different from animal life, and even though this letter may indicate 
otherwise, I have no mental life at all.  Right at the end of the second 
trimester of my future development (if I ever get thawed out!) my brain 
will undergo a dramatic change.  Brain cells that were once poorly 
connected now have millions of new connections, and my neocortex, 
undifferentiated at 25 weeks, will have its full six layers by 33 
weeks.  After this point I would continue my explosive brain development, 
and, if I were born premature, this could be monitored externally by rapid 
eye movement, which would indicate a very lively dream life.
         Although they used the wrong arguments, the good justices came to 
the correct conclusion: the state should intervene to protect my life 
during the third trimester not before.
I wish to make clear that this definition of a person includes even most 
humans of low mental capacity.  But, if I make it to implantation, I just 
hope that I am not like Baby Ashley of Boise, Idaho, who was born with only 
a brain stem and incapable of supporting basic functions, let alone the 
mental life of a human person.
This argument about the start of my life as a person should be used to 
determine the end of a person's life as well.  In the cases of Karen Ann 
Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan the courts have been morally and legally correct: 
humans who are brain dead are no longer persons.
Parents of Nancy Cruzan and the husband of Terri Schiavo were right about 
the only decent way to honor their loved ones' dignity as former 
persons.  In both cases doctors and scientists were unanimous in their 
opinion that persons no longer lived in those biological shells, and no 
amount of sincere sentiment would make it otherwise.
         Mr. DeLay, if you are really serious about protecting me as the 
person I am not, you should then should pass a law that requires all frozen 
embryos to be implanted forthwith in wombs that I suppose will be 
commandeered by federal marshals.  You will also have to fund an urgent 
program that will prevent the spontaneous abortion of at least 60 percent 
of my fellow embryos.
But relax, I am not a person, so you will not have to do anything as absurd 
as this.  At the same time, however, are not these the logical implications 
of the "culture of life" that you so strongly affirm?  And how about all 
the animal life that is being slaughtered for meat every day?
I'm really flattered that you have given me such a high moral status, but I 
cannot honestly accept such a premature promotion.  Perhaps you if can 
arrange for my release and a nice womb in which to be implanted, I could 
honor you with my presence as a real live person.
Nick Gier, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, taught philosophy and religion 
at the University of Idaho for 31 years.  His full article on abortion can 
be found at www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/103/abortion.htm.


"Modern physics has taught us that the nature of any system cannot be 
discovered by dividing it into its component parts and studying each part 
by itself. . . .We must keep our attention fixed on the whole and on the 
interconnection between the parts. The same is true of our intellectual 
life. It is impossible to make a clear cut between science, religion, and 
art. The whole is never equal simply to the sum of its various parts." 
--Max Planck

Nicholas F. Gier
Professor Emeritus, Department of Philosophy, University of Idaho
1037 Colt Rd., Moscow, ID 83843
http://users.adelphia.net/~nickgier/home.htm
208-882-9212/FAX 885-8950
President, Idaho Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO
http://users.adelphia.net/~nickgier/ift.htm

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050320/77e0a460/attachment.htm