Political Crossfire Forums

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

Imagine this scenario:

Recent advances in medical science allow for brain transplants. One unfortunate night a 15 YO girl is declared brain dead and a 35 YO female car crash victims brain is transplanted into it.

This raises some interesting issues about mind and body and also how rights are determined. If the woman goes back to her family in the 15 YO body:

Would her husband be guilty of statuatory rape if he slept with her?

Would she be able to purchase alcohol?

Could she drive?

Would she be able to vote?

Would she have to attend school?

What rights does she have? Those of an adult or those of a child?

If she has the rights of an adult would it not be true that her mind was the defining factor behind her rights?

Obilisk18 · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 538

Selfish_Meme wrote: Imagine this scenario:

Recent advances in medical science allow for brain transplants. One unfortunate night a 15 YO girl is declared brain dead and a 35 YO female car crash victims brain is transplanted into it.

This raises some interesting issues about mind and body and also how rights are determined. If the woman goes back to her family in the 15 YO body:

Would her husband be guilty of statuatory rape if he slept with her?

Would she be able to purchase alcohol?

Could she drive?

Would she be able to vote?

Would she have to attend school?

What rights does she have? Those of an adult or those of a child?

If she has the rights of an adult would it not be true that her mind was the defining factor behind her rights?

What a bizarre yet intriguing scenario. I would suspect that were this to occur, the only consistent and logical position would involve forcing the woman to live life with all of the rights of a child. Adulthood is judged on the basis of physical age in this country. We do not, for instance, grant adulthood to extremely precocious 10 year olds.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

But her brain is 35 YO, so what physical aspect of her do you measure her by if it is to be based on age.

Also what if they just uploaded her mind into a childs brain that had been cloned, there would be more basis for discrimination by age then, but still it would be a mature mind, and it would want all the rights it thought were its due.

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

What does this have to do with abortion?

Anyways, I believe the mind is the most important item in this scenario. The only reason why we have age limits to begin with towards certain things is because of the stage of developement the mind is usually in that is attached with it. Alcohol and sex could be used at two perfect examples. States have their own limits for sex, and the federal government has set a limit for alcohol (or if you choose not to accept it, you lose funding). The reason those age limits have been chosen is because of the mindset that is usually attached with someone at that age. Why did they choose 21 and not 12? Because at 21 you're usually more responsible to deal and handle alcohol.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

Abortion is about rights, so if rights are determined by mind, that effects the morality of abortion.

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

Come up with an abortion scenario than, we shall analyze.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

I think it is implicit to the abortion debate, it doesn't need recasting in an abortion scenario.

Kt · Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 3806

When sufficiently-advanced cybornetic bodies become avalaible, I absolutely intend to have my brain implanted into one. Besides, I need the power of Panzer Kunst.

Selfish_Meme wrote: Imagine this scenario:

Recent advances in medical science allow for brain transplants. One unfortunate night a 15 YO girl is declared brain dead and a 35 YO female car crash victims brain is transplanted into it.

This raises some interesting issues about mind and body and also how rights are determined. If the woman goes back to her family in the 15 YO body:

Would her husband be guilty of statuatory rape if he slept with her?
I do not believe so, she is a 35 year old woman, how can he rape a 35 year old woman?(if she consents) This opens another question, will adult brains be implanted into the bodies of minors for the purpose of legalized underaged prostitution? Humans are sick, you can count on that. Quote:

Would she be able to purchase alcohol?
Anyone at any age should be able to purchase alchohol, so yes Quote:

Could she drive?
I'd imagine after her motor-functions are restored and she is able to manipulate pedels and a steering wheel again, brain transplant is not easy and there will probably be months, or years, or rehabilitation. Quote:

Would she be able to vote?
Why the hell not? Quote:

Would she have to attend school?
These qustions are getting kind of stupid, of course not, she already went to school. Quote:

What rights does she have? Those of an adult or those of a child?
Adult Quote:

If she has the rights of an adult would it not be true that her mind was the defining factor behind her rights?
Indeed, when you go to school, teachers aren't educating your body, they are educating your mind.

Kt · Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 3806

Her lifespan may not be increased eaither, and if it is, most likely by a small amount, sure the body is 15, but the brain is 35, her body will appear to be 40 and she will start showing alzheimers and dementia symptoms if she's not careful.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

statuatory rape doesn't have anything to do with consent, its basically sex with an underage person. I think you be taking the points a bit to literally.

Kt · Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 3806

Selfish_Meme wrote: statuatory rape doesn't have anything to do with consent, its basically sex with an underage person. I think you be taking the points a bit to literally.
If she's not a minor, but 35, how is it statuatory rape to f**k her?

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

Her body is a minors, thats what the excersice was about, Asking for your opinion on whether she is a minor or an adult, one poster thought she should be treated as a minor despite having an adults mind and you obviously think she should be treated as an adult despite having a minors body.

Your opinion puts you in the camp mind decides rights, the other posters puts him on the opposing side.

ubikk · Joined: 27 Jul 2006 Posts: 2050

Selfish_Meme wrote: Imagine this scenario:

Recent advances in medical science allow for brain transplants. One unfortunate night a 15 YO girl is declared brain dead and a 35 YO female car crash victims brain is transplanted into it.

This raises some interesting issues about mind and body and also how rights are determined. If the woman goes back to her family in the 15 YO body:

Since most age-based laws are predicated on the idea that older people are more capable of making decisions, I'd say the brain wins.
Quote:
Would her husband be guilty of statuatory rape if he slept with her?

I'd say no. For one, they are still married.

Quote: Would she be able to purchase alcohol?

I would say yes. It is the same mind making the decisions

Quote: Could she drive?

Because this requires brain-muscle coordination, I would say "yes" provided she can pass a driving test.

Quote: Would she be able to vote?

Yes.

Quote: Would she have to attend school?

No, particularly if you can show that her brain already graduated.

Quote: What rights does she have? Those of an adult or those of a child?

Adult. Her brain should be capable of making rational decisions for which she can be held fully responsible as an adult.

Quote: If she has the rights of an adult would it not be true that her mind was the defining factor behind her rights?

Yep.

Obilisk18 · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 538

[quote= Selfish_Meme] But her brain is 35 YO, so what physical aspect of her do you measure her by if it is to be based on age.

Also what if they just uploaded her mind into a childs brain that had been cloned, there would be more basis for discrimination by age then, but still it would be a mature mind, and it would want all the rights it thought were its due.[/quote]

Precocious 10 year olds have mature minds as well (IQ was orginally a ratio of mental age to biological age). Many 35 year olds can barely string two sentences together let alone make responsible decisions. Yet, we deny the former full rights and grant them to the latter. Indeed, it is undeniable that we as a society grant adulthood on the basis of biological age. If the mind were relevant, we would require IQ tests for citizenship. I wonder, would you support that, with your fixation on the mind as the basis for rights? If so, you'd be in some pretty esteemed company. Nazi's, segregationists, eugenicists to name just a few.

Ek0nomik · Joined: 17 Jul 2005 Posts: 2065 Location: La Fleur

The debate is simple. If a 15 year old girls mind is put into a 35 year old womans body, that 35 year old woman has now turned 15. Done. The physical appearance doesn't determine responsibility, maturity, kindness, rudeness, or anything of the like. Both boys and girls mature at different rates, therefore making the physical appearance of themselves obsolete, and wholey reliant on their age and the maturity level that gets attached with it.

Selfish_Meme · Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 726

The poster above you begs to differ, I think this is an essential sticking point, between pro-life and pro-choice. To pro-choice people it is obvious she is a 35 YO woman no matter what body she is in. Pro-life people see the outside body and must determine she is a minor.

It's true that I am focused on mind as a defining factor, and I'm sure the nazi's and several other peoples throughout history made distinctions between people, not on mind though, I would wager. We however are no better. It happens in our everyday society with discrimination against children. They do not enjoy the same rights as an adult, therefore they are distinct. We have said children are different and imposed an arbitrary age on when they are no longer children.

Yet when someone comes along and imposes an arbitrary age on when mind determines the right to life we are up in arms.

That is called hypocrisy.

If you truly think that she is a 35 YO woman no matter the body, then you know a fetus is mindless, even a newborn shows little sapience, many animals that we kill everyday will be able to outperform it in intellectual tests.

This does not mean we think it is valueless as many pro-life people would like to believe. True we don't value it anywhere near as much as the mother, who has this unique and amazing thing called mind. However our offspring should be cherished, it makes good biological sense, they need our protection to achieve their full potential. Just as some mothers need protection to achieve their potential.

The rights of the mindless should not outweigh the rights of the minded.