Chick is not the same as a chicken. An embryo is not the same as a chick, a fertilized egg is not the same as an embryo. And finally, a fertilized egg is not the same as a chicken.
Their genome is the same but they are not the same.
Of course organisms are not "the same" at each stage of their life cycle. That is not the point and your language remains sloppy. You are not the same as you were 10 years ago or the same as you will be 10 years hence. Nevertheless you are human aka homo sapien at all points in your changing life and entitled to basic human rights throughout. Similarly the chicken is not the same at the various stages of its life but it is still a chicken Gallus gallus domesticus throughout each stage of its development and life. Your problem is you want to take a portion of the homo sapiens species and arbitrary declare it non human based presumably on your personal desire to profit directly or indirectly via the scientific gains you feel the death and dismemberment of such individuals will afford you. That is wrong but you have somehow blinded yourself to that fact. Ok, at least you understand that they are not the same. So a fertilized human egg is not THE SAME as a human being, right? Do you agree? So, which of them are human and which aren't? The DNA of the fertilized egg is the same as the DNA of the adult. Both are human. They are simply at different stages of their life.  Two people are human beings. Two fertilized human eggs are two fertilized human eggs. A fertilized human egg is not THE SAME as a human being (a newborn child), right? Fertilized human eggs are not the SAME as human newborn babies from which they have developed, right? |
|
|
|
Go to science. Put cause-and-effect, entropy, and complexity together, and try to get our universe without God. Bonus: All our machines come from machinery operations in the universe. None of the machines we make is ever made from machinery operations from outside the universe. The universe is a machine. Machines have makers. And Gods have makers who also have makers, ad infinitum. |
|
|
|
Chick is not the same as a chicken. An embryo is not the same as a chick, a fertilized egg is not the same as an embryo. And finally, a fertilized egg is not the same as a chicken.
Their genome is the same but they are not the same.
Of course organisms are not "the same" at each stage of their life cycle. That is not the point and your language remains sloppy. You are not the same as you were 10 years ago or the same as you will be 10 years hence. Nevertheless you are human aka homo sapien at all points in your changing life and entitled to basic human rights throughout. Similarly the chicken is not the same at the various stages of its life but it is still a chicken Gallus gallus domesticus throughout each stage of its development and life. Your problem is you want to take a portion of the homo sapiens species and arbitrary declare it non human based presumably on your personal desire to profit directly or indirectly via the scientific gains you feel the death and dismemberment of such individuals will afford you. That is wrong but you have somehow blinded yourself to that fact. Ok, at least you understand that they are not the same. So a fertilized human egg is not THE SAME as a human being, right? Do you agree? |
|
|
|
...
With your logical fallacy, we might as well call everything alive a living organism and throw away all the descriptions we have developed over the years to properly describe living organisms, name them, categorize and identify different stages of their development. You can take your analogy even further and say that some atoms in the universe are 'future chicken in progress'. LOL.
...
The only logical fallacy is yours. The start of life the moment of conception is the only clear and objective metric possible use when differentiating life from non-life. Any other division or "personhood metric" is utterly subjective. BADecker summed it up well above. Your failure to understand it is just that your failure. ...
Removing a human life is different that removing a wart.
Determining when the embryo/fetus becomes a human life is judgmental. Nobody can make such a determination accurately. To do so means that the judgment could be at age 10, or at age 20, or at any other age. This is part of the reason we have wars. One group of humans says that another group of humans should be exterminated.
...
A fertilized human egg is simply a stage in human life. Legal murder at this stage sets the stage to make it legal at any stage.
...
What you can't seem to grasp is that you are accepting the moral exclusion of a vast portion of humanity. Such a process taken to its logical conclusion can just as easily be turned against you or more likely your descendants. A genetically engineered and "superior" branch of humanity may decide that your obvious inferiority makes you not a "real person" and mark you down for liquidation. Or perhaps an AI vastly superior to you in all ways will examine you as you examine the human embryo and decide that you are so far below its level of awareness that you don't count as conscious. After all is it not just to apply your own logical framework upon you? You may dismiss these possibilities as far fetched but technology is marching us day by day to the point where they will be very possible. Go to the farmer's market and buy eggs and meat chickens. Then compare. Your failure to understand the difference is astounding. You are making a false equivalence logical fallacy. Chick is not the same as a chicken. An embryo is not the same as a chick, a fertilized egg is not the same as an embryo. And finally, a fertilized egg is not the same as a chicken. Their genome is the same but they are not the same. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/245/False-Equivalence |
|
|
|
Yes that is a chicken embryo. This one was killed probably for this photo but had it not been killed and had it been kept warm between 99 and 102 degrees Fahrenheit it would have grown into a baby chick in less then 21 days. For those who don't know. Chicken eggs purchased at stores are eggs not embryos. They lack the small embryonic tissue highlighted in af_newbies photo. I am talking about fertilized chicken eggs. Focus, doctor, focus. Is this a chicken, doctor? It was the very beginning of a new chicken life. It is a dead chicken. I am guessing you have not seen a dead chicken. A dead chicken does not look like a fertilized egg. LOL. You are just dishonest to acknowledge the difference and admit that you are making a logical fallacy. I don't think you are a complete idiot, despite the fact that you hang on to a lost argument only a complete moron or BADecker would. It is not a dead chicken, it is a fertilized egg. This is what a dead chicken looks like:  With your logical fallacy, we might as well call everything alive a living organism and throw away all the descriptions we have developed over the years to properly describe living organisms, name them, categorize and identify different stages of their development. You can take your analogy even further and say that some atoms in the universe are 'future chicken in progress'. LOL. You guys are comedians. "Fertilized eggs are dead chickens" WTF? You guys are cracking me up. |
|
|
|
A chicken is not a fertilized egg, right?
A fertilized egg is not a chicken, right?
PS. I don't buy eggs at the store. LOL. I get them from my chicken house.
A chicken embryo is a very young chicken at the start of its life. I mean seriously use your eyes and look at the picture of the embryo I posted immediately above. You can call it a "fertilized egg" all you want. Its obviously very young chicken about to come out of its shell. You can go find pictures of chicken embryo younger then 14 days old that are clearly not ready to leave their shells. They will look less and less recognizable the younger they are until you get back to the single cell stage once more. That does not change anything those are still a chickens. They are chickens in their very earliest stages of development and unrecognizable visually for what they are but they are chickens nevertheless. I am talking about fertilized chicken eggs. Focus, doctor, focus. Is this a chicken, doctor? |
|
|
|
You forgot to add a chicken egg. An egg is not chicken, it will turn into an embryo, then into a chick, right?
No eggs do not spontaneously transform into embryos. The kind of eggs you buy at the store are not embryos they are just eggs. They never had any chance of becoming a chicken. You are confusing yourself and attempting to mislead anyone reading this thread with your constant use of disingenuous and misleading language. An egg is not an embryo. The egg will not spontaneously do anything other then sit there. The embryo is the first stage of a new living organism and it will will spontaneously develop into a living adult. A chicken is not a fertilized egg, right? A fertilized egg is not a chicken, right? Here is what a fertilized egg looks like (just in case you have never seen one): PS. I don't buy eggs at the store. LOL. I get them from my chicken house. Yes, we have a rooster. |
|
|
|
But physically your 'chickens in process' are not chickens, they are eggs, right?
If I asked you to draw an egg, what would you draw?
If I asked you to draw a chicken, what would you draw?
You are too tied up in superficial and transient external characteristics. If I asked you to draw a newborn baby chick what would you draw? If I asked you to draw an adult rooster what would you draw? These look nothing like each other but they are just stages of development of the same creation. The same is true of the embryo. Embryo:  Chick:  Adult:  You forgot to add a chicken egg. An egg is not chicken, it will turn into an embryo, then into a chick, right? A chicken is not an egg, right? |
|
|
|
You continue to like killing humans because they do not have fully developed organs like some other humans have. Is a 30-y-o human without arms and legs still a human? You like to pick on certain aspects, but you don't do it with equality. Humans are humans, from the instant of fertilization to the moment of death. Think about this. If unfertilized eggs, or sperm that didn't do any fertilizing, developed into humans, then they would be humans, as well. Since they don't, they aren't humans. I will make it really simple for you and your sidekick CoinCube. You just picked up a fresh, fertilized chicken egg. Are you holding an egg or a chicken? Now, a researcher handed you a petri dish with a fertilized human egg. Are you holding a petri dish with a fertilized human egg or a human being? Hint: We make omelets from eggs not chickens. Thank you for making it doubly simple for me to make it simple for you. Fertilized chicken eggs are chickens in process. Just because we don't think or talk of them that way, doesn't mean they aren't that way. How do we know? Like we cook and eat the chicken, so we cook and eat the egg. Like we cook and eat the egg, so we cook and eat the chicken. Simple, right? They are in process up until the time we cook and eat them, or until they die of old age. Now, considering people. Fertilized human eggs are people in process. Just because some judges or wacky scientists don't think of them that way, doesn't mean they aren't that way. How do we know? Like we kill people in war, so we kill fertilized-egg, unborn people in abortion. Like we kill fertilized-egg, unborn people in abortion, so we kill people in war. The petri dish holds a human being in early stages of life... except if you kill the human. But physically your 'chickens in process' are not chickens, they are eggs, right? If I asked you to draw an egg, what would you draw? If I asked you to draw a chicken, what would you draw? |
|
|
|
Spit is just an example of cells that have a full human genome, and yet they are not a human being. You can substitute your pubic hair follicles if you like. You guys started talking about how human fertilized eggs are human beings because they have a human genome.
I said over and over again that I am against the killing of viable babies. You perverted your religious 'soul injection at conception' into something that it is not.
At fertilization, a human egg is not a human being.
Why is it hard for you to understand this? I don't get it, you cannot be that stupid or ignorant.
Please, please... Stop humiliating yourself like this. Don't you realize that some hair-folical-cell, even though it has the complete genome of the particular human, is not a cell that can develop into a fully grown adult human? How in the world self degrading are you trying to be? You know this, yet you make believe that somebody is saying that any old cell in a person is the full human. But the fertilized egg is a full human being... simply at a certain stage of its development for the moment. If a man/woman is 20-years-old, and lives 30 more years, isn't he/she still a human being at any of these ages? Why are you trying to take away the humanity of people because they are not as fully developed at one stage as another? You are probably in favor of euthanasia, right?, because a 90-y-o is not a human being any longer, right? You talk like you want to see people live, but you neglect recognizing what people are. How in the world dense are you? Just because a human isn't as developed at some stage of its life, doesn't make it any less of a human. If you like killing off humans so much, stop condemning the Bible when there is righteous talk of killing humans to get rid of the killing. You are acting like a complete hypocrite. Does your 'fertilized egg' have medulla oblongata, or any other specialized organ that human beings have? Why are you calling it a 'human being'? Who said I like killing humans? I am not your Biblical God. You continue to like killing humans because they do not have fully developed organs like some other humans have. Is a 30-y-o human without arms and legs still a human? You like to pick on certain aspects, but you don't do it with equality. Humans are humans, from the instant of fertilization to the moment of death. Think about this. If unfertilized eggs, or sperm that didn't do any fertilizing, developed into humans, then they would be humans, as well. Since they don't, they aren't humans. I will make it really simple for you and your sidekick CoinCube. You just picked up a fresh, fertilized chicken egg. Are you holding an egg or a chicken? Now, a researcher handed you a petri dish with a fertilized human egg. Are you holding a petri dish with a fertilized human egg or a human being? Hint: We make omelets from eggs not chickens. |
|
|
|
Spit is just an example of cells that have a full human genome, and yet they are not a human being. You can substitute your pubic hair follicles if you like. You guys started talking about how human fertilized eggs are human beings because they have a human genome.
I said over and over again that I am against the killing of viable babies. You perverted your religious 'soul injection at conception' into something that it is not.
At fertilization, a human egg is not a human being.
Why is it hard for you to understand this? I don't get it, you cannot be that stupid or ignorant.
Please, please... Stop humiliating yourself like this. Don't you realize that some hair-folical-cell, even though it has the complete genome of the particular human, is not a cell that can develop into a fully grown adult human? How in the world self degrading are you trying to be? You know this, yet you make believe that somebody is saying that any old cell in a person is the full human. But the fertilized egg is a full human being... simply at a certain stage of its development for the moment. If a man/woman is 20-years-old, and lives 30 more years, isn't he/she still a human being at any of these ages? Why are you trying to take away the humanity of people because they are not as fully developed at one stage as another? You are probably in favor of euthanasia, right?, because a 90-y-o is not a human being any longer, right? You talk like you want to see people live, but you neglect recognizing what people are. How in the world dense are you? Just because a human isn't as developed at some stage of its life, doesn't make it any less of a human. If you like killing off humans so much, stop condemning the Bible when there is righteous talk of killing humans to get rid of the killing. You are acting like a complete hypocrite. Does your 'fertilized egg' have medulla oblongata, or any other specialized organ that human beings have? Why are you calling it a 'human being'? Who said I like killing humans? I am not your Biblical God. |
|
|
|
I am not dehumanizing anyone. WTF are you talking about?
.... When you throw away fertilized eggs human embryos you are not killing humans like you are suggesting. Those are just human cells like some spit on the side of the road.
You are dehumanizing new human life at its earliest stages comparing it to spit on the side of the road. You think this is justified and that the new human life really is just spit on the side of the road and should be treated like spit. In this you fall into the same tired pattern as the Tutsis, the Nazis, and the slavers highlighted above. But this is different you say. These humans really are just spit they are not conscious, they are helpless, undeveloped, weak, and dependent on tremendous outside intervention to even stay alive. Without a mother they will quickly wither and die. That is all true but they are nevertheless human. We are highly unlikely to agree on this topic. Spit is just an example of cells that have a full human genome, and yet they are not a human being. You can substitute your pubic hair follicles if you like. You guys started talking about how fertilized human eggs are human beings because they have a human genome. I said over and over again that I am against the killing of viable babies. You perverted your religious 'soul injection at conception' into something that it is not. At fertilization, a human egg is not a human being.Why is it hard for you to understand this? I don't get it, you cannot be that stupid or ignorant. |
|
|
|
Some human beings will never be human. LOL.
...
A fertilized egg...
Ah more dehumanizing language despite having been shown that it is not the most scientifically accurate language to use. Once again the proper term for what you are describing is a single celled embryo or zygote. 'Less Than Human': The Psychology Of Crueltyhttps://www.npr.org/2011/03/29/134956180/criminals-see-their-victims-as-less-than-humanDuring the Holocaust, Nazis referred to Jews as rats. Hutus involved in the Rwanda genocide called Tutsis cockroaches. Slave owners throughout history considered slaves subhuman animals. In Less Than Human, David Livingstone Smith argues that it's important to define and describe dehumanization, because it's what opens the door for cruelty and genocide.
...
This is just the latest iteration in a pattern that has unfolded time and again over the course of history. In ancient Chinese, Egyptian and Mesopotamian literature, Smith found repeated references to enemies as subhuman creatures. But it's not as simple as a comparison. "When people dehumanize others, they actually conceive of them as subhuman creatures," says Smith. Only then can the process "liberate aggression and exclude the target of aggression from the moral community."
When the Nazis described Jews as Untermenschen, or subhumans, they didn't mean it metaphorically, says Smith. "They didn't mean they were like subhumans. They meant they were literally subhuman."
...
A rough answer isn't hard to come by. Thinking sets the agenda for action, and thinking of humans as less than human paves the way for atrocity.
I was paraphrasing Steve Jobs. I am not dehumanizing anyone. WTF are you talking about? "There is a big difference between a human being and being human" - Steve Jobs. You never heard of religious fanatics going out and shooting people at random? Did you actually read the Bible? Fuck man, you cannot be serious. Psalm 137:9 "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." |
|
|
|
Why are you making an exception for a bunch of cells on a petri dish? Because a fertilized egg has the potential of becoming a human being?
I don't care what the Bible says. This is the vilest book I have ever read. You can safely dismiss EVERYTHING the Bible says.
A fertilized egg is not a human being. If you think it is, show me? Does it have a brain and liver? How about the lungs?
There is no exception. A skin cell is not a unique human with the potential for independent life. With a little time and support the human embryo will not only unfold into all of the secondary characteristics you so value it will also eventually learn to stand on its own and support itself. Clearly you should care about what the Bible says perhaps then you would not be so keen to sacrifice the most vulnerable human lives upon the alter of science. You can play with words all you want. The bottom line is that fertilized eggs will not become a human being without a human female host and a long gestation period. When you throw away fertilized eggs you are not killing humans like you are suggesting. Those are just human cells like some spit on the side of the road. Grow up. You live in some carefully constructed bubble. Even if you play with hundreds, thousands or even millions of human cells, you are still way short of the 37.2 trillion that the average human being has. Check your math 'doctor'. |
|
|
|
... At what stage do you consider the human being to be a human? Do you have factual info that such age is really the right age? After all, the whole human genome of the human in question is present in that fertilized egg in the petri dish, the moment it is fertilized. Are you saying that you would rather err on the side of killing a human rather than letting him/her live? Don't you realize that you are fomenting war against your own nation by being in favor of abortion freedom? In the Bible, when they offered their children as sacrifices to their false gods, they at least had a reason. But now they murder their kids just for convenience, or so that they can increase their pleasure. I hadn't realize how warped you really are. Some human beings will never be human. LOL. The whole human genome is present in your saliva and every cell in your body. Yet, you don't consider all your cells human beings. Why not? Why are you making an exception for a bunch of cells on a petri dish? Because a fertilized egg has the potential of becoming a human being? I don't care what the Bible says. This is the vilest book I have ever read. You can safely dismiss EVERYTHING the Bible says. A fertilized egg is not a human being. If you think it is, show me? Does it have a brain and liver? How about the lungs? |
|
|
|
Letting a fertilized egg die is not murder.
As for abortion, fetuses do not have rights, women do have rights.
I think abortions should be free and allowed to around 8-10 weeks. There is nothing wrong with removing a little wart growing on the uterus wall.
When that wart becomes a viable child, I do have a problem with killing that child. If it is between a woman's life and the baby, I would say a woman should be saved, not the baby.
What you guys are proposing is that fertilized human eggs should have a legal 'person' status. That is just ridiculous.
A fertilized egg is just a bunch of cells on a petri dish. Murder? You guys are irrational.
Fertilizing an egg and making a human being by this fertilization is what we are talking about. Doing the fertilizing without preparing for life for the human so created is negligent homicide in common language, not legal language. The woman gave up some of her rights when she placed herself in the position of being trustee for another human. Removing a human life is different that removing a wart. Determining when the embryo/fetus becomes a human life is judgmental. Nobody can make such a determination accurately. To do so means that the judgment could be at age 10, or at age 20, or at any other age. This is part of the reason we have wars. One group of humans says that another group of humans should be exterminated. No! Humans should NOT have legal "person" status. See https://redress4dummies.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/office-of-person1.pdf. A fertilized human egg is simply a stage in human life. Legal murder at this stage sets the stage to make it legal at any stage. If you are so against human life, why are you not suiciding yourself? Just a question. Don't do it. Your troubles will only be beginning if you do. You will have to face God in the judgment for your own murder. EDIT: Banning stem cell research is the only safe way we can keep from murdering people... at this stage of our knowledge. Why? Because we don't know much about the epigenetic markers that control stem cells for making a human being. Once we know about and can control the epigenetic markers, so that we don't accidentally make a human (that we kill later), then (maybe) we can go ahead with such research in a right way. Do you even realize that you have more reasons to commit suicide than me? I have none. I am an Atheist, remember? I have more reasons to live than you. Show some empathy to people who suffer, don't focus all your energy on fertilized eggs on a petri dish. This research can enhance the lives of millions of people, forever!!! What are you afraid of? That one day we will be able to create human eggs, and sperm in the lab, and make humans at will. And your religion will join the rest of mythologies we have learned in the history class, is this what you are afraid of? What is your beef in this? Why do you care if fertilized eggs die on their own and don't care when kids die in Ethiopia or Syria? Whew! I was afraid, there, for a moment, that you might commit suicide, and we'd all be out of your humorous posts that we laugh at. Killing people to enhance the lives of others is what war is all about. But you are too chicken to go fight in a real war, so you fight the embryos and fetuses. Big brave af-newbie.What are you so afraid of? enhance your life in the millions of ways available that don't have to do with murdering human beings... especially humans in their most vulnerable period in life. (Big brave af-newbie.) What's the matter? Attempting to pry into my inner thoughts and emotions just to blab? If you even made any sense, it would be amazing. Do you think fertilized eggs on a petri dish are people? Oh, boy, you guys are special, aren't you? PS. I would not go to any war, even if I was younger. I am a pacifist. Let the other idiots fight wars. Wars accomplish nothing, destroy our resources, kill bunch of people to redraw the borders on the map. Nothing changes. |
|
|
|
Letting a fertilized egg die is not murder.
As for abortion, fetuses do not have rights, women do have rights.
I think abortions should be free and allowed to around 8-10 weeks. There is nothing wrong with removing a little wart growing on the uterus wall.
When that wart becomes a viable child, I do have a problem with killing that child. If it is between a woman's life and the baby, I would say a woman should be saved, not the baby.
What you guys are proposing is that fertilized human eggs should have a legal 'person' status. That is just ridiculous.
A fertilized egg is just a bunch of cells on a petri dish. Murder? You guys are irrational.
Fertilizing an egg and making a human being by this fertilization is what we are talking about. Doing the fertilizing without preparing for life for the human so created is negligent homicide in common language, not legal language. The woman gave up some of her rights when she placed herself in the position of being trustee for another human. Removing a human life is different that removing a wart. Determining when the embryo/fetus becomes a human life is judgmental. Nobody can make such a determination accurately. To do so means that the judgment could be at age 10, or at age 20, or at any other age. This is part of the reason we have wars. One group of humans says that another group of humans should be exterminated. No! Humans should NOT have legal "person" status. See https://redress4dummies.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/office-of-person1.pdf. A fertilized human egg is simply a stage in human life. Legal murder at this stage sets the stage to make it legal at any stage. If you are so against human life, why are you not suiciding yourself? Just a question. Don't do it. Your troubles will only be beginning if you do. You will have to face God in the judgment for your own murder. EDIT: Banning stem cell research is the only safe way we can keep from murdering people... at this stage of our knowledge. Why? Because we don't know much about the epigenetic markers that control stem cells for making a human being. Once we know about and can control the epigenetic markers, so that we don't accidentally make a human (that we kill later), then (maybe) we can go ahead with such research in a right way. Do you even realize that you have more reasons to commit suicide than me? I have none. I am an Atheist, remember? I have more reasons to live than you. Show some empathy to people who suffer, don't focus all your energy on fertilized eggs on a petri dish. This research can enhance the lives of millions of people, forever!!! What are you afraid of? That one day we will be able to create human eggs, and sperm in the lab, and make humans at will. And your religion will join the rest of mythologies we have learned in the history class, is this what you are afraid of? What is your beef in this? Why do you care if fertilized eggs die on their own and don't care when kids die in Ethiopia or Syria? |
|
|
|
Every discussion on Hitler ends up with the ethnically targeted concentration camps and killing of Jews.
But people rarely discuss what brought that situation. What was the stand of Hitler on the issue. And how that amount of jews ended up in Germany and in the hands of Hitler.
Because people do not study history, read Hitler's Mein Kampf, learn more about who Adolf Eichmann was, and what they initially set out to do. People learn the shortcuts: Hitler was a crazy lunatic who created concentration camps, we bombed the shit out of him, the end. |
|
|
|
I thought we were talking about human beings?
Human beings are not magically made at conception/fertilization.
It is a long process to get from a fertilized egg to a human being.
A fertilized egg is not a human being. It can become one, but it is not at conception/fertilization.
Again you attempt to create an arbitrary disctinction without foundation. Even your language is misleading. A egg after union of ovum and sperm is no longer an egg at all. It is inappropriate to call it one. The new life is a single celled embryo or if you want to be extremely technical a zygote. We are talking about human beings. Early undeveloped human beings but human nevertheless. Humans go through many changes over the course of our lives. The embryo is different than the infant, the child, the adult, and the elderly and infirm. All stages are different but all are human and deserving of human rights and dignity. .
As for fetuses being somehow independent human life, well, they are part of a woman, so technically it is a woman life we are talking about.
At some point, the viability stage, you have to separate the two and say you have two human beings.
But at fertilization, on a petri dish? You are just irrational.
A fetus is certainly not independent it is a life that needs its mother for a time to survive a need that extends long after birth. That is the primary reason why sexual activity outside of marriage is ethically problematic. It often brings new human life into the world. New human life that emerges into an environment that often does not welcome or support its existence. It is immoral to engage in activities that lead to such an outcome. Listen, you really have to think about what life is. A fertilized egg on a petri dish is not human life unless we somehow find a way to artificially sustain it until it becomes a viable human being on its own. The same fertilized egg implanted into a woman's uterus lives as part of the mother and eventually develops to be a human being. When CNS and internal organs completely form you have a human being, IMHO. As for abortion, well, it all depends on when you think you have another human being growing inside the mother, and how you weigh in the mother's rights. On what grounds do you think an embryo or a fetus has the right to violate a woman's body? If the mother does not want to have her body violated, does the growing embryo have any right to violate her without her consent? Because you say so? You can argue about the time limits of when the abortions should be allowed in the pregnancy, is it 2, 4, 8, 10+ weeks, etc. But dismissing women's rights and banning it altogether is just plain evil, IMHO. So is killing a viable baby, btw. Banning stem cell research is just plain crazy. There should be no discussion on this. There is not much to discuss. Your stance on stem cell research is dogmatic, illogical and irrational. |
|
|
|
Your assumption that a fertilized egg is a human being is ridiculous. Who told you that a fertilized egg is a human being? Whoever did that, knew squat about human biology. And you think you are a medical doctor?
As for your poetic reference to the Faustian bargain, well, I don't know what soul is, so I don't know what mythological mumbo-jumbo you are talking about. As for morals, my morals are superior to most of the Bible book club members.
There is no assumption just fact. Human life begins at sperm-egg fusion this is an uncontested scientific and objective conclusion. Furthermore it it’s a conclusion reached independently of any ethical or religious view of human life. Development and growth is a continuous process but your attempt to argue that early human life has no value is logically flawed. Your “personhood” criteria a stage where you feel young human beings are suddenly deserving of being extended basic human rights is utterly arbitrary. You have deliberately avoided defining it because you know it’s arbitrary and that there is no solid scientific grounds for making such a distinction. Life begins at conception. In regards to your claim of moral superiority... Well let’s just say we I think you are doing a good job showing us all what your morals really are. I thought we were talking about human beings? Human beings are not magically made at conception/fertilization. It is a long process to get from a fertilized egg to a human being. A fertilized egg is not a human being. It can become one, but it is not at conception/fertilization. I am not sure a fertilized egg on a petri dish qualifies as human life. As for fetuses being somehow independent human life, well, they are part of a woman, so technically it is a woman life we are talking about. At some point, the viability stage, you have to separate the two and say you have two human beings. But at fertilization, on a petri dish? You are just irrational. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
