Demonstration Evaluation

  This post will evaluate a demonstration video on how to make a paper gun, which I found by searching the phrase "how to" on youtube.com.  The gun shown in the video is much simpler than the one in the picture above (which is made of paper, by the way), but something as complicated as the one above would require a much longer video.  The link to the video can be found here.

  This video shows the viewers how to construct a fairly simple paper crossbow, through a series of simple steps.  Most of these steps involve rolling several pieces of paper to form strong tubes, and then cutting and taping them together.  While the video was very easy to follow, I would have preferred that the demonstrator had communicated what the final product would be, as I was expecting a much more complex gun.  Besides that, the video was simple and effective, although if I ever become so bored that I decide to make a paper gun, I will choose a different video with a more aesthetically pleasing product.

Response: Ethics and Medicine by Adam Vander Pas

  This is in response to Adam's post concerning abortion.  Adam begins by explaining the controversy surrounding abortion, referencing the Roe v. Wade court case of 1973.  He states that the deciding question in the argument is when life begins.  He goes on to say that pro-lifers are frequently bashed as being 'un-scientific,' and asks why the moment when the heart starts beating is any more scientifically sound as the beginning of life than the moment of conception.    He references two articles, one pro-choice and the other pro-life.  He says that in making this decision we should use common sense, and realize that it is impossible to define when life begins.  However, he gives his definition, saying that conception is the point at which life begins because it creates a potential person.  He ends by saying that a woman should take responsibility for her sexual decisions, while he does acknowledge the case of rape.  Adam's article can be found here.

  While I do agree that pro-lifers are frequently bashed as being unscientific and illogical, perhaps unfairly, it is true that they appeal mainly to emotional arguments, rather than logical ones.  Have you ever seen a pro-life billboard?  Anyways, Adam's solution to the problem is to completely ban abortion, since it is so difficult to define when a human life starts.  Regardless of whether or not abortion is moral, it is an important issue which should not be dismissed solely because it is difficult to define when life starts.  There is a reason women go to extreme lengths to obtain abortions, and this decision should be made very carefully.  The question we must ask ourselves here is fundamentally what defines a human being.  I contend that human beings are defined not by our actual DNA, but by our mental capacity.  If pro-life supporters took the time to consider how they actually define a human being, they might become vegetarian.  If an abortion is done early enough, the embryo will have no neurons, and therefore the mental capacity of a jellyfish.  As cold as it sounds, killing a conscious cow is more akin to murder than killing a lump of cells.  Soon, we may be able to create a human being from a single skin cell.  Should we stop shedding skin because each skin cell could eventually be a potential human being?  Anyways, my position is that a human becomes a being when they can think.