|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,390 Year: 3,647/9,624 Month: 518/974 Week: 131/276 Day: 5/23 Hour: 1/2 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2954 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: When does human life begin? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Shad writes: The Catholic chrurch's postion is that life begins at conception. And when exactly is that? The "moment" of conception is fraught with gradualistic realities. Firstly sometimes more than one sperm penetrates the egg and it takes time for the egg to eject those extra chromosones. And even once we are down to a single sperm it can be over a day before the genes of the sperm and egg combine. And then another day for the new genome to control the cell. So the "moment" of conception is more like a 48 hour period. When during this process has a human life been created do you think?
Shad writes: Is there a medical- scientific postion on when human life begins? There is some medical research into the brain development of fetuses and suchlike. But there isn't a definite science defined point at which we can say - "Yes this is now a human being" or "No this is not". It is necessarily arbitrary to some extent. In the same way that adulthood is a necessarily arbitrary legal distinction loosely based on biological development.
Shad writes: I am not a scientist, but based upon my beliefs I concur with the church's postion. The Roe v. Wade decision medically is really not supported by any scientific evidence, just the belief of Justice Burger. Did you know that about 60% of all conceptuses end up flushed down the toilet without anyone even realising that any conception had taken place? The majority of conceptuses never implant in the uterus. If the church really wants to save human lives and genuinely believes that human life starts at the "point" of conception they should focus on research into this majority of conceptuses rather than get too riled up about the comparatively tiny amount that get intentionally aborted. If saving human life as they have defined it really is the issue....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Larni writes: As far as I recall in the UK the fetus has no rights till it is born but as Percy say 'life' is and arbitarary point. That seems to be the case. From Wiki on the Murder in English law:
Wiki on Murder writes: For a killing to amount to murder by a defendant, the defendant must have caused the death of "a reasonable creature in rerum natura". The phrase as a whole is usually translated as "a life in being", i.e. where the umbilical cord has been severed and the baby has a life independently of the mother. "Reasonable" here is used as in the 16th Century, meaning "something that may reasonably be considered [a living creature]". The case Attorney General's Reference No. 3 of 1994 is a relatively recent case involving a murder charge for death of an unborn child. The Law Lords (now the Supreme Court) considered the case of a man who stabbed his pregnant wife in an argument. The wife recovered but delivered the baby prematurely. The baby died some time after the premature birth. The cause of death was simply that she had been born prematurely due to the effect of the attack on the mother, rather than due to any injury.[4] In that case, Lord Mustill noted that the legal position of the unborn, and other pertinent rules related to transferred malice, were very strongly embedded in the structure of the law and had been considered relatively recently by the courts.[4] The Law Lords concurred that a fetus, although protected by the law in a number of ways, is legally not a separate person from its mother in English law. Link
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Shad writes: I would think the time of conception is when the sperm and egg have combined to form 46 human chromosomes that are implanted in the uterus and the human embryo is formed. So rather confusing your "moment of conception" isn't actually when conception takes place at all. What you have described is called implantation'. Implantation occurs 7-14 days after conception and like all other biological processes implantation is a gradualistic process that defies the idea of "moments". Can I ask if you believe in the existence of a soul? And if so when do you think the soul is formed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Shad writes: I would think the time of conception is when the sperm and egg have combined to form 46 human chromosomes that are implanted in the uterus and the human embryo is formed. Straggler writes: So rather confusing your "moment of conception" isn't actually when conception takes place at all. What you have described is called implantation'. Implantation occurs 7-14 days after conception and like all other biological processes implantation is a gradualistic process that defies the idea of "moments". Can I ask if you believe in the existence of a soul? And if so when do you think the soul is formed? Shad writes: Yes I believe in the existence of a soul. I think it is implanted in a human being when life begins. And when exactly do you think it is that "life begins"......? How are you identifying the beginning of life on which your position depends? If I look at 2 egg-sperm combinations, one of which meets your criteria of a life and one of which doesn't, how can I tell which is which?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
Are those who are infertile for whatever reason "alive"....?
I don't think you can define life in terms of ability to reproduce without facing some rather silly consequences.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
JBR writes: This fact completely destroys the notion that measurable brain activity is a good criteria for determining person hood. I've yet to see anything that can meaningfully be called a "person" that actually lacks a brain. Whilst I suspect that setting any absolute single criteria for human personhood is going to run into difficulties some sort of brain development based position seems more justifiable than most. On what basis are you suggesting we should attribute personhood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Numbers writes: However "ability to reproduce" is in the definition. Name me one organism in any Taxa that does not reproduce. What on Earth has taxanomic classification of species got to do with deciding whether or not any given embryo or foetus qualifies as a human being or not? Any infertile member of any species is an example of "one organism in any Taxa that does not reproduce". Any human pre-pubescent child would qualify. If ability to reproduce is the criteria then none of us qualify as human until we hit puberty. Are we really going to disqualify 8 year old kids from being human?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
So what exactly is your point? That a zygote qualifies as a human life because it is capable of cellular reproduction? The same could be said of a cancerous growth.
What exactly are you saying with regard to the topic here?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Numbers writes: I made my point. In my opinion a human life begins when a woman becomes pregnant and the baby develops a brain. Firstly - If brains are your criteria why on Earth are you banging on about cellular reproduction as the defining criteria for life? Secondly - So when exactly is that? How do we identify this point where a brain has been "developed"....?
Straggler writes: That a zygote qualifies as a human life because it is capable of cellular reproduction? The same could be said of a cancerous growth. Numbers writes: Oh so you equate a human zygote with a cancerous growth? Dude you are the one ranting on about life being defined by the capability to replicate cells. Not me.
Numbers writes: Are you saying that aborting a zygote is the same as excising a tumor? The same? In what sense? Morally? Physically? In terms of personhood?
Numbers writes: I guess if you feel that way you would not have a problem cutting your penis off. I mean after all it is but so much tissue. Oh whats that you say? It happens to be using your circulatory system and central nervous system? Well now maybe we will look at those little bits of naughty bits in a new way eh? Perhaps it is comes down to what value humans assign to our reproductive tissues eh? Are you equating dicks with zygotes now? If I wanted my dick removed I think, that as a person, that would be my personal right. Likewise if a woman wants a zygote removed I think that is her personal right. What do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Straggler writes: What do you think? Numbers writes: I think that is the bees knees. Profound. The thread asks - "When does human life begin?" It seems that your thinking on this issue is somewhat conflicted and very definitely confused. It has (according to you) something to do with cellular reproduction. And (according to you) something to do with brain development. But quite what, or how these things are related or reconciled, is anybodies guess. Including, I suspect, your own.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
So - In summary - You define life as that which can reproduce cells but you define human life specifically as that which has a sufficiently developed brain?
Numbers writes: That imo human life begins with when a woman becomes pregnant and the brain develops. So who again is confused? What in that is irreconcilable? "Me thinks thou dost protest to much." I'm only protesting at the conflicting ambiguities of your different criteria. How do we identify this stage where a brain has been sufficiently "developed" for you to consider the cells in question as qualifying for human life? And if brain development is your criteria why are you defining anything at all remotely relevant to this thread in terms of ability to reproduce cells?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Numbers writes: Which is fine as long as you realize I was not defining the inception of human life with it's ability to reproduce. Then what are you defining in terms of the ability to reproduce and what possible relevance does it have to this thread?
Straggler writes: How do we identify this stage where a brain has been sufficiently "developed" for you to consider the cells in question as qualifying for human life? Numbers writes: The 24-28th week. OK. But that isn't "how". That is "when". What is it about the brain of a 24-28 week old foetus that qualifies it for human life? I'm not even disagreeing with you here. Just trying to clarify what the hell it is you are actually getting at.
Straggler writes: And if brain development is your criteria why are you defining anything at all remotely relevant to this thread in terms of ability to reproduce cells? Numbers writes: Because you started fucking with me. I started "fucking with" you because you were making statements about the ability to reprodeuce cells that were either idiotic or irrelevant in this thread context. You have plumped for irrelevant which is probably the more justfiable of the two options.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Your entire position in this thread depends upon there being a "point" when human life begins. But you still cannot tell us when exactly it is that you think it is that human "life begins"......
Shad writes: Yes I believe in the existence of a soul. I think it is implanted in a human being when life begins. How are you identifying the beginning of life on which your position depends? If I look at 2 egg-sperm combinations, one of which meets your criteria of a life and one of which doesn't, how can I tell which is which?
Shad writes: What saddens me is the intent of the woman who took the morning pill in full knowledge that it will abort the baby developing in her womb. Is a zygote a "baby".....? If a "baby" is a human being with personhood then you are making a lot of evidentially unjustifaible assumptions.
Shad writes: Did you ever consider that your opinions hold no weight with anyone other than the people that hold your opinion. OK. If nobodies un-evidenced opinion alone should carry any weight then on what criteria do we base the judgements related to abortion upon? Are there any criteria that we can agree upon to attribute personhood to something and if so what are they? Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Shad writes: I am of the opinion that human life at some point begins. When is that point? Be specific. Your entire position depends upon this "point" existing.
Shad writes: Do you deny that propostion? Yes. There is no 'point'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Straggler writes: I've yet to see anything that can meaningfully be called a "person" that actually lacks a brain. Whilst I suspect that setting any absolute single criteria for human personhood is going to run into difficulties some sort of brain development based position seems more justifiable than most. On what basis are you suggesting we should attribute personhood? JBR writes: Actually if you will look at the post I made that seems to have started this fire storm (#28) I was clearly pointing out that there currently exists no basis in which we can establish when person hood begins. Jolly good. Then can we also agree that anything lacking a brain of any sort fails to qualify for personhood?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024