Health and Religion

[BADecker]

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?

No two people are exactly the same. 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.

[af_newbie]

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?

No two people are exactly the same. 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?

[BADecker]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

[af_newbie]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

So don't tell me that I am killing babies when I destroy fertilized eggs.

Case closed.

[BADecker]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

So don't tell me that I am killing babies when I destroy fertilized eggs.

Case closed.

Destroying dead fertilized eggs isn't killing babies.

Destroying live, fertilized, human eggs is killing human beings - people.

[af_newbie]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

So don't tell me that I am killing babies when I destroy fertilized eggs.

Case closed.

Destroying dead fertilized eggs isn't killing babies.

Destroying live, fertilized, human eggs is killing human beings - people.

I thought you agreed that LIVE fertilized human eggs are not the SAME as LIVE human babies?

Anyway, it was fun talking to both of you.  Looks like you have some mental issues going on so I won't bother you.

Take care.

[BADecker]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

So don't tell me that I am killing babies when I destroy fertilized eggs.

Case closed.

Destroying dead fertilized eggs isn't killing babies.

Destroying live, fertilized, human eggs is killing human beings - people.

I thought you agreed that LIVE fertilized human eggs are not the SAME as LIVE human babies?

Anyway, it was fun talking to both of you.  Looks like you have some mental issues going on so I won't bother you.

Take care.

I thought you agreed that nobody is the same from one day to the next?

Looks like you have some denial issues going on.

The major idea of all the rhetoric is to get you to see that you are thinking way off-base, and that such thinking is a religion for you, that will ultimately wreck your health... even your health for eternity.

We don't know that you are truly locked in to your current attitude, but if I did, I would be posting differently. And maybe you would be, too.

[af_newbie]

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?

You are getting sooo good.

A coffin is often the result of a human fertilized egg... hopefully 90 or a hundred years down the road.

A baby before it poops its diaper is not the same as it is after it poops its diaper.

90-y-o people are not the same as the 20-y-o people they have developed from.

So don't tell me that I am killing babies when I destroy fertilized eggs.

Case closed.

Destroying dead fertilized eggs isn't killing babies.

Destroying live, fertilized, human eggs is killing human beings - people.

I thought you agreed that LIVE fertilized human eggs are not the SAME as LIVE human babies?

Anyway, it was fun talking to both of you.  Looks like you have some mental issues going on so I won't bother you.

Take care.

I thought you agreed that nobody is the same from one day to the next?

...

When a 40-year-old man is killed, nobody in their right mind would say that an alive fertilized egg has been killed.
We would say a human being has been killed.  

Why?  Because a fertilized egg is not a human being, dead or alive.  

That is why it is nonsensical to say that a human being has been killed when an alive fertilized egg has been destroyed.

All you can say, alive fertilized eggs have been destroyed.

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

[IadixDev]

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

Ontologically speaking even a stone is a being 

[af_newbie]

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

Ontologically speaking even a stone is a being  

So now we play with words.

You know what I meant, a sentient being, not that it merely exists.

[IadixDev]

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

Ontologically speaking even a stone is a being  

So now we play with words.

You know what I meant, a sentient being, not that it merely exists.

Words are important

Edelman and the likes show that its not that easy to know where sentience and consciousness really starts or ends.

At which point you consider a cell or a group of cell is sentient or not ?

[af_newbie]

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

Ontologically speaking even a stone is a being  

So now we play with words.

You know what I meant, a sentient being, not that it merely exists.

Words are important

Edelman and the likes show that its not that easy to know where sentience and consciousness really starts or ends.

At which point you consider a cell or a group of cell is sentient or not ?

It is hard to determine exactly when this happens as it is a cumulative process, and it is dependent on the environment and genetics.
It is also species-dependent.

To be aware of your environment you need some sort of complex brain.  In the case of a human pregnancy, I am sure that in most cases, a viable fetus is a sentient being.

Consciousness is a result of your brain processing all the inputs, current and past.  When you deprive your brain of oxygen, it slowly dies, when all cells die and the RNA/DNA in your brain cells fragments, there is no going back, your brain is dead forever, and your consciousness ends forever.  

The claim made earlier in this thread that a fertilized egg is a human being is so ridiculous that it blows my mind how people can be so dogmatic.

I only entertained it to lead them out of their logical fallacy.

[BADecker]

When a 40-year-old man is killed, nobody in their right mind would say that an alive fertilized egg has been killed.
We would say a human being has been killed.  

Why?  Because a fertilized egg is not a human being, dead or alive.  

That is why it is nonsensical to say that a human being has been killed when an alive fertilized egg has been destroyed.

All you can say, alive fertilized eggs have been destroyed.

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

When a 40-y-o dies, we say a person dies. When a fertilized egg dies, we say a fertilized egg dies. The reason we don't say person with the egg is that the egg is a human in progress. But really, so is the 40-y-o.

Just because we say something one way or another, doesn't mean that we are denying that a fertilized egg is a human being.

The denial that a fertilized egg is a human being is a denial. The acceptance of a fertilized egg being a human being is the acceptance of such. None of it depends on what we say.

In other words, if a fertilized egg dies, someone might say, "A human being just died." Another person might say, "We don't usually say it this way, but you are right."



EDIT: When you are asleep, you are not conscious. Does this mean that you are not a human being when you are asleep? What about in a coma? Does someone stop being human just because he is in a coma?

[af_newbie]

When a 40-year-old man is killed, nobody in their right mind would say that an alive fertilized egg has been killed.
We would say a human being has been killed.  

Why?  Because a fertilized egg is not a human being, dead or alive.  

That is why it is nonsensical to say that a human being has been killed when an alive fertilized egg has been destroyed.

All you can say, alive fertilized eggs have been destroyed.

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

When a 40-y-o dies, we say a person dies. When a fertilized egg dies, we say a fertilized egg dies. The reason we don't say person with the egg is that the egg is a human in progress. But really, so is the 40-y-o.

Just because we say something one way or another, doesn't mean that we are denying that a fertilized egg is a human being.

The denial that a fertilized egg is a human being is a denial. The acceptance of a fertilized egg being a human being is the acceptance of such. None of it depends on what we say.

In other words, if a fertilized egg dies, someone might say, "A human being just died." Another person might say, "We don't usually say it this way, but you are right."



EDIT: When you are asleep, you are not conscious. Does this mean that you are not a human being when you are asleep? What about in a coma? Does someone stop being human just because he is in a coma?

Just because something "could become" does not mean it "is".  Deal with reality, not what you want it to be.

[BADecker]

When a 40-year-old man is killed, nobody in their right mind would say that an alive fertilized egg has been killed.
We would say a human being has been killed.  

Why?  Because a fertilized egg is not a human being, dead or alive.  

That is why it is nonsensical to say that a human being has been killed when an alive fertilized egg has been destroyed.

All you can say, alive fertilized eggs have been destroyed.

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

When a 40-y-o dies, we say a person dies. When a fertilized egg dies, we say a fertilized egg dies. The reason we don't say person with the egg is that the egg is a human in progress. But really, so is the 40-y-o.

Just because we say something one way or another, doesn't mean that we are denying that a fertilized egg is a human being.

The denial that a fertilized egg is a human being is a denial. The acceptance of a fertilized egg being a human being is the acceptance of such. None of it depends on what we say.

In other words, if a fertilized egg dies, someone might say, "A human being just died." Another person might say, "We don't usually say it this way, but you are right."



EDIT: When you are asleep, you are not conscious. Does this mean that you are not a human being when you are asleep? What about in a coma? Does someone stop being human just because he is in a coma?

Just because something "could become" does not mean it "is".  Deal with reality, not what you want it to be.

The fertilized, living egg IS a human being. That's the point.

[af_newbie]

When a 40-year-old man is killed, nobody in their right mind would say that an alive fertilized egg has been killed.
We would say a human being has been killed.  

Why?  Because a fertilized egg is not a human being, dead or alive.  

That is why it is nonsensical to say that a human being has been killed when an alive fertilized egg has been destroyed.

All you can say, alive fertilized eggs have been destroyed.

Fertilized eggs are not beings, never mind human beings.

When a 40-y-o dies, we say a person dies. When a fertilized egg dies, we say a fertilized egg dies. The reason we don't say person with the egg is that the egg is a human in progress. But really, so is the 40-y-o.

Just because we say something one way or another, doesn't mean that we are denying that a fertilized egg is a human being.

The denial that a fertilized egg is a human being is a denial. The acceptance of a fertilized egg being a human being is the acceptance of such. None of it depends on what we say.

In other words, if a fertilized egg dies, someone might say, "A human being just died." Another person might say, "We don't usually say it this way, but you are right."



EDIT: When you are asleep, you are not conscious. Does this mean that you are not a human being when you are asleep? What about in a coma? Does someone stop being human just because he is in a coma?

Just because something "could become" does not mean it "is".  Deal with reality, not what you want it to be.

The fertilized, living egg IS a human being. That's the point.

You are a moron.  No amount of evidence will change your mind.

[BADecker]

The fertilized, living egg IS a human being. That's the point.

You are a moron.  No amount of evidence will change your mind.

Well, you're mor-off than mor-on. However, to quote another post in this thread, "No amount of evidence will change your mind."

[CoinCube]

The fertilized, living egg IS a human being. That's the point.

You are a moron.  No amount of evidence will change your mind.

Well, you're mor-off than mor-on. However, to quote another post in this thread, "No amount of evidence will change your mind."

Af_newbie you do realize that 50% of the US population is prolife don’t you?

United States anti-abortion movement
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_anti-abortion_movement

The United States anti-abortion movement (or the pro-life movement or right-to-life movement) contains elements opposing induced abortion on both moral and sectarian grounds and supports its legal prohibition or restriction. Advocates generally argue that human life begins at conception and that the human zygote (or embryo or fetus) is a person and therefore has a right to life.

Public opinion is slowly shifting on this topic and we are waking up from our stupor of institutionalized violence against the unborn.



I suspect current trends will continue and society will one day look back on our murderous crimes against the unborn with the same horror we now reserve for other great crimes against humanity.

[af_newbie]

The fertilized, living egg IS a human being. That's the point.

You are a moron.  No amount of evidence will change your mind.

Well, you're mor-off than mor-on. However, to quote another post in this thread, "No amount of evidence will change your mind."

Af_newbie you do realize that 50% of the US population is prolife don’t you?

United States anti-abortion movement
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_anti-abortion_movement

The United States anti-abortion movement (or the pro-life movement or right-to-life movement) contains elements opposing induced abortion on both moral and sectarian grounds and supports its legal prohibition or restriction. Advocates generally argue that human life begins at conception and that the human zygote (or embryo or fetus) is a person and therefore has a right to life.

Public opinion is slowly shifting on this topic and we are waking up from our stupor of institutionalized violence against the unborn.



I suspect current trends will continue and society will one day look back on our murderous crimes against the unborn with the same horror we now reserve for other great crimes against humanity.

Truth is not a popularity vote.

It does not matter how many people are for it or against it.  Not long ago 99% of people believed that Earth is flat and is in the center of the universe and all the stars revolved around it.

It is what it is.

Anyone who is sane should be for the preservation of life.  The question is where you draw the line.

Nature is teeming with life.  We grow life in factories just to kill it at a tender age.  We grow life only to cut it just when the seeds mature.
We spray chemicals with no end to kill animals and ourselves.

The truth of the matter is that a fertilized egg is not a sentient being, never mind a human being, that develops much later.

This "pro-life" stance is purely dogmatic or I should say political.  People who scream they are "pro-life" have no problem ordering a steak or veal, eat eggs and whole animals or use services of the in-vitro clinic. It is really comical.

Basically, the majority of the pro-life folks say: "We are pro-life, no matter what!"  and omit to add "as long as it could be a human life".
And the same parrots have no problem going to war and kill children, as long as they are not from their tribe.

If you can show me that a fertilized egg on a petri dish has some brain activity, I am willing to change my mind.
Until then, it is just a bunch of cells.

People who are against stem cell research are uneducated, dogmatic morons, IMHO.

PS. Pull up statistics on evolution, age of the Earth, God creation myth.  Does that make any of them true or false?  The numbers mean diddly-squat whether the proposition is true or false.  Follow the evidence not what people believe at one point in time.  100 years ago women did not have a personhood status.  Alan Turing killed himself because he was homosexual and was ordered by the court to either undergo chemical castration or go to prison. Homosexuality was illegal in the UK at the time.  The majority of people believed that homosexuals should be castrated, I bet you this was after centuries of reformation, a few hundred years ago homosexuals were just killed, as per the Bible recommendation. Atheists face a death penalty in Saudi Arabia.  The majority of people in that country are in favor of this penalty.

PPS.  Crimes against humanity? LOL.  What about human crimes against nature?  They are not important in your book, I guess.
Me, me, me. Humanity is a plague.

[CoinCube]

Truth is not a popularity vote.

It does not matter how many people are for it or against it.  

Hey we agree on something for once. I am with you on this one something is true or false moral or immoral inherently and objectivity and it really does not matter if it is a majority or a minority that is able see to understand that truth.

However, I am surprised to see this line argument from you. It was not that long ago when you said this.

morality is relative and is not absolute.

So are you a believer now in objective truth and objective morality?

...
Nature is teeming with life.  We grow life in factories just to kill it at a tender age.  We grow life only to cut it just when the seeds mature. We spray chemicals with no end to kill animals and ourselves.

People who scream they are "pro-life" have no problem ordering a steak or veal, eat eggs and whole animals or use services of the in-vitro clinic. It is really comical.
...
And the same parrots have no problem going to war and kill children, as long as they are not from their tribe.
...
Crimes against humanity? LOL.  What about human crimes against nature?  They are not important in your book, I guess.
Me, me, me. Humanity is a plague.

Sounds like you have figured out that mankind is fallen. We indeed commit many crimes against nature which we have stewardship over. However, we will never be able to stop those crimes unless we first stop committing crimes against ourselves.

Romans 5:12-14
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned— To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command.

Revelations 12:12
woe to the earth and the sea