Watch this. Now.

Marco Rubio always seems to follow Peter's four word advice about speech-giving: "Crack jokes. Tell stories." It's a rarity in the Senate, where so many are in love with the sounds of their own voices. But the principles that undergird these words are the key element, the aspect so often sorely lacking in political speeches today.

Comments:


Michael Kellogg
Joined
Dec '10
Michael Kellogg
Valiuth: Well I look forward to having the choice of picking him to be the Republican Nominee for President. My great fear will be that he will run against Christ Christie and I will be paralyzed by indecision.  · 3 hours ago

Read about Christie's poor decisions on judicial appointments and you may not have that fear anymore.


Joined
Apr '11
Ken Burns

billy

Ben Domenech: Those close to Rubio say he'd prefer to be Jesse Helms, not an early Veep pick. We'll see. · 24 minute

I hope so. The VP slot would be a waste of his talents. · 1 hour ago

Being VP would be a waste of his talents.  But being VP would elevate him to the likely nominee in 2020.  Being the VP nominee on a losing 2012 ticket would elevate him to the likely nominee in 2016.  

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

One more point on personhood, since that's what this debate really revolves around.

Personhood is not an objective trait. It is relational. Personhood is "who" a person is. Though certain aspects of a person's character are constant, those aspects are important or unimportant depending on who you ask.

"Who is so-and-so?" He's a father or son. He's a friend or colleague. He's a good man, or a selfish man, or an impatient man. He's a New Yorker, a Texan or a Turk. He's a liberal or a conservative.

How we answer "who" changes depending on the circumstances... on who is asking and why. The more mature and experienced a person, the more possible answers one might provide.

The question of personhood as relates to abortion is really about what grants a being a right to life.

I would respond that the right to life — inherent human value — does not derive from one's actions or any quality which emerges during maturation before or after birth. Our value comes from without, not from within. We are each inherently precious because we are uniquely loved creations and adopted children of God.

EThompson
Joined
Dec '11
EThompson

Brian Watt

Valiuth: Well I look forward to having the choice of picking him to be the Republican Nominee for President. My great fear will be that he will run against Christ Christie and I will be paralyzed by indecision.  · 25 minutes ago

Look I like Christie, too...but he's hardly the Messiah. :-) · 3 hours ago

Particularly as he supported the Ground Zero mosque.

Charles Mark
Joined
Aug '10
Charles Mark

I think he was too soft on the pro-choice side. Maybe that was what the occasion demanded?

Guy Incognito
Joined
Dec '11
Guy Incognito

I did like how he refuted the whole evictionist argument, which, in living up to its "third way" claim, is just the same policy as Left but with a different name.  If a parent says "I don't want this noisy newborn and so am evicting it from my house, as I have a right to do as it is my private property", and the baby freezes to death, that ex-parent will then be charged with murder.  While the unborn baby may seem like a trickier matter, it is effectively the same situation.

Valiuth
Joined
Apr '11
Valiuth

Brian Watt

Valiuth: Well I look forward to having the choice of picking him to be the Republican Nominee for President. My great fear will be that he will run against Christ Christie and I will be paralyzed by indecision.  · 25 minutes ago

Look I like Christie, too...but he's hardly the Messiah. :-) · 3 hours ago

Maybe I like him subconsciously more than I thought...or I can't spel one of the two. ;-) 

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs
Aaron Miller: Personhood is not an objective trait. It is relational. Personhood is "who" a person is.

Whoa.  As Ricochet's own, self-appointed, in-house Personalist, I protest.  

Personhood is an ontological category of objective being. It is not reducible to relations.

Ben Domenech

katievs

Aaron Miller: Personhood is not an objective trait. It is relational. Personhood is "who" a person is.

Whoa.  As Ricochet's own, self-appointed, in-house Personalist, I protest.  

Personhood is an ontological category of objective being. It is not reducible to relations. · 5 minutes ago

Personhood distracts from the nature of this in my view. What is a human life? Someone who is 1. human and 2. alive. The rest is mere meandering.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Ben Domenech

Personhood distracts from the nature of this in my view. What is a human life? Someone who is 1. human and 2. alive. The rest is mere meandering. 

As Ricochet's own self appointed in house Personalist, [hereinafter ROSAP], I must protest again.

Questions related to the nature and dignity of personhood are 1) as a matter of historical fact at the heart of the ethical debate, and 2) the richest vein of philosophical gold for overcoming the culture of death.


Joined
Jan '12
Noesis Noeseos

Aaron Miller: ...

Personhood is not an objective trait. It is relational. Personhood is "who" a person is. Though certain aspects of a person's character are constant, those aspects are important or unimportant depending on who you ask.

"Who is so-and-so?" He's a father or son. ...

The question of personhood as relates to abortion is really about what grants a being a right to life.

 ...· 2 hours ago

Are you saying that relations lack objectivity? Consider a father and son.  Each is subjective to himself but objective to the other.  Each is a person (in law at the very minimum).

While we cannot say what sort of subjectivity an embryo might possess, it remains objectively a living human being, a life distinct from although attached to and dependent upon its mother.  In no case is it absorbed completely into her subjectivity.  Its life instantiates the life of the species just as uniquely as that of a child, an adult, or a man or woman facing the hour of death.

Perhaps you mean to say that personality is not a static or an abstract trait.

Edited on February 5, 2012 at 1:37am
Brian Clendinen
Joined
Mar '11
Brian Clendinen

It was a good speech, however, it is not in the best of category unless you servery limit your population to Presidents/Senators. Among others Alan Keys has speeches on this issue that are a lot better.

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

There's no doubt in my mind that he's the best VP candidate.  I'd pay money to see him debate Biden.

Aaron Miller
Joined
May '10
Aaron Miller

 

Ben Domenech

Personhood distracts from the nature of this in my view. What is a human life? Someone who is 1. human and 2. alive. The rest is mere meandering.

The reason particular views on abortion and euthanasia so often coincide is precisely because being human and alive is not enough to satisfy many people.

katievs

Personhood is an ontological category of objective being. It is not reducible to relations.

So what is a person?

It's not defined by intelligence, or we would value the adult chimp more than a human baby for its greater self-awareness, greater logical abilities and greater potential for interaction.

What makes a human being a "who" rather than a "what"?

Butters
Joined
May '11
Ningrim

I like that Rubio framed the argument in terms of human rights, irrespective of whether you believe those rights come from God or not. Those are the types of arguments that can win over the other side. There is no reason the pro-life position can't be argued on secular terms.

Would have liked to hear his take on the health of the mother and rape exceptions the left always brings up.

Limestone Cowboy
Joined
Oct '10
Limestone Cowboy

Wow!

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs
Aaron Miller:  It's not defined by intelligence, or we would value the adult chimp more than a human baby for its greater self-awareness, greater logical abilities and greater potential for interaction.

Here you are confusing ontological value and function.

A human baby is an absolutely unique and irrepeatable individual, of the kind that has an inner life, a self, rationality; that "possesses itself" in freedom.  

It has an ontological dignity, a rank in being, a status, that lifts it far above every other kind of earthly creature, regardless of its stage of development.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs
Ningrim: There is no reason the pro-life position can't be argued on secular terms.

Say philosophical rather than secular and I'd agree. 

Secularism too often suggests atheistic materialism.

Butters
Joined
May '11
Ningrim

Aaron Miller:

So what is a person?

· 8 minutes ago

homo sapien, no exceptions

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Ningrim

Aaron Miller:

So what is a person?

· 8 minutes ago

homo sapien, no exceptions · 5 minutes ago

Yes.  But "homo sapiens" is a animalistic term that does not, IMO, adequately reflect the radical distinction between lower forms of life and persons.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In