|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: When does human life begin? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
nwr writes:
No. And I'll thank you not to make such insinuations.The OP only asked about when life begins. It did not ask about terminating life. I responded only to what was asked. And you should have responded to only what I wrote. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Do I understand that your postion is that human life begins over the first few years after birth?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
catholic scientist writes:
Well, there isn't. Its gradual. You're asking; at what point in the following picture does black become white: Would you agree that at some point human life begins, even if, as you say its gradual?Saying it is gradual necessarily admits that at some time it begins. Or am I missing something?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
hooah writes:
As would most anyone. However, we aren't talking about children, are we? We are talking about clumps of cells that could potentially turn into children..... But this is the sort of rhetoric that is to be expected from the anti-choice camp: "you're killing children!". Tug on the heart strings and make the other side out to be kid-killing monsters..... the OP is about when human life begins. As an aside, that perhaps I should not have gotten into, is the abortion issue.I am not prochoice because I believe once life begins it should not be destroyed. I can see Percy getting upset about being off thread. So all I wanted were whether there are medical, scientific facts or opinions as to when human life begins.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
shadow writes: It seems pretty clear that there is quite a difference from a woman having a miscarriage and a woman having an abortion. Do you disagree? Rahvin writes: I am truly saddened when a woman miscarries, losing the baby she loved and wanted to abring into the world. But I am more saddened when a woman decides that she does not want the human life and intentionally ends that life. I disagree, because there is an uneven application of moral worth in each case. If a woman takes the Morning After pill, which prevents the implantation of a fertilized zygote on the uterine wall, effectively causing a miscarriage, most Pro-Lifers (basically anyone who believes that moral considerations for procreation begin at conception, like you) beleive that, essencially, a murder has occurred. A motehr has taken an active role in ending the life of her unborn child, and you are saddened and outraged. If a woman miscarries without knowing, a perfectly natural version of teh above events where the only difference is intent and a pill, you are not saddened, and not outraged. Your moral consideration is for the act of the woman, which is different in each case, and not for the loss of the zygote, which is the same in both cases.Rahvin writes: I am saddened when I know any life ends. If in fact life has begun I mourn the loss of that life. For me life has begun when the Lord says it has begun. This OP is as to whether medicince-science know when life begins. You were sad when you lost your unborn daughter just 8 weeks before she was due to be born. Were you sad for the children you have lost by natural means during the first few weeks of pregnancy? Are you sad about them now, knowing that 60% of all pregnancies end this way without the mother's knowledge, to the same degree that you are sad about your unborn daughter? Does the knowledge that, when your wife has her period, on some months the discharge contains a fertilized zygote, which you claim you consider a child, actually make you just as sad as when your wife had her much later miscarriage? If "human life" begins at conception, then both the 4-celled zygote and the almost-born daughter were children deserving equal emotional attachment, equal protection, and equal sadness for their deaths.Rhavin writes: If we lost a child at 1 minute or 8 months I am saddened by that loss. By your logic miscarriages at 1 month are not as bad as miscarriages at 8 months. I don't feel that way. You are attributinig your moral opinions to me. You can't do that because you do not know me and what I think and feel.
I don't think you actually care as much about a zygote as you do about a fetus 8 weeks from being born. I don't think you cry for their loss as you cried for the loss of your daughter 8 weeks before she was born. And that being the case, you agree that the moral weight of a zygote is less than a fetus in the late third trimester; you agree that the moral weight of an unborn child is acquired incrementally as it develops and becomes closer to becoming what you would feel is a person.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
hooah writes: How can you be "saddened" if no one knows she miscarried? Hell, just because she takes a morning after pill doesn't even mean there was something "there" the morning after. 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. Why would she take the pill if she doesn't want to abort? hooah writes: Did you ever consider that your opinions hold no weight with anyone other than the people that hold your opinion. Pretty lame analogy if you ask me. What your are saying is that my opinions if based on my beliefs are inferior to your opinions that are based upon your beliefs. The moment you bring your deity/belief/religion into the discussion is the moment you remove yourself from dictating what other people do. You are free to have an opinion on the matter and use your belief to base that opinion, but that opinion holds no weight with anyone other than yourself or perhaps others who hold that same belief. Oddly enough, different people, believing in the same "lord" as you, reading from the same book, will say life begins at a different time than you do. What does that say about the validity of this "lord" of yours in determining when life begins? Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
nwr writes:
I think I was clear enough. Moral agency develops over the first few year. "Human life" is too broad a term to be definable or to be useful. Could you possibly define "moral agency" for me. I am of the opinion that human life at some point begins. Do you deny that propostion?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Zen Deist writes:
The real question is when does this continuum of life begin to be a distinct living breathing heart thumping thinking human being. On common moral grounds, it is important to be consistent at both ends of the spectrum of life. Thus the concept of beginning needs to be consistent with current medical practice in determining when a human life has ended. This criteria has been developed over a significant period of time with a lot of ethical input from all sides into the specific ethical considerations involved. I appreciate your post but it does not answer the question of this OP namely when does human life begin. Your are discussing quality of life not the beginning of life.An answer to the OP I just found can be found at this the link below, by Maureen L. Condic a Prof. of neurobiology and Anatomy. Her answer supported by scientific research is that human life begns at the moment of the sperm-egg fusion or the formatin of a zygote. This formation of the zygote initiates a sequence of events that establish the molecular conditions that are required for the continued embryonic delevopment. Westchester Institute.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Wounded King writes: What is your opinion as to when human life begins? You get all upset because I present a qualifed scientist's opinon as to when life begins supported by scientific studies and opinions.
Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of other anti abortion sites that will give you other similar answers "supported by scientific research". Is this paper uncorrect?What does science say as to when life begins? If it doesn't agree with your findings is it pretend? Here is a quote from Alan Guttmacher. Is he all wet and pretending science falls in line with his already beliefs? "A facet that makes the obstetrician's burden unique in the whole field of medicine is his double obligation; he simultaneously cares for two patients, the mother and the infant...The essential step in the initiation of life is by fertilization, the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the fusion of the two cells into a single cell." - Dr. Alan Guttmacher, ardent proponent of abortion, in his book Pregnancy and Birth: A Book for Expectant Parents New American Library; Revised Ed edition (January 1, 1962) He was the president of Planned Parenthood and fought to make and keep abortion legal. I think you should attack the paper upon it's scientific findings instead of rejecting it out of hand because of the philosophy of the group presenting the author. Edited by shadow71, : spellling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Granny Magda writes:
That it began around three and half billion years ago. The issue is not when life begins, or even when an individual life begins. It's when person-hood begins and that must always remain a somewhat arbitrary judgement. Just as WK says, it's not a question to which science can give us a definitive answer. As such, the question of when an individual life begins is not relevant to the abortion debate. I was discussing human life and that was the topic of this tread. I respectfull disagree that the question of when an individual life begins is not revelant to the abortion debate.I think all agree that the intent of abortion is to eliminate a human life. See Planned Parenthood. How would you define "personhood"? Is threre no human life until personhood?That's, in my opinion, a pretty dangerous moral slope to stand on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Straggler writes:
Look Shadow I know that for religious reasons you need there to be a "moment" at which soul imbued human life springs forth. But the fact is that biology doesn't work that way. And furthermore the "moment" you have decided to pin your hopes to results in 60% of all souls never making it past the conceptus stage anyway. How are you going to reconcile your definition with these facts? Are you really suggesting that over 60% of humans have never even physically existed beyond a cell or two? That may well be true, I can't answer that question. I have expressed my opinion based on my moral essence. I then linked a biologists who is of the scientific opinion as to when life begins. I am not trying to convert anyone to my beliefs.The purpose of the thread was to disccuss whether there was a scientific consensus as to when life begins. It appears to me that that consensus is either at conception or shortly thereafter, but I may be wrong. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
bluegenes writes:
I don't think that's what you meant to ask. I meant human life, the subject of this tread.
bluegenes writes:
Her conclusion doesn't follow from her technical description. That is your opinion and she obviously disagrees with you. I don't know your qualifications, but do know she is a qualified biologist. If you are also qualfied to give that opinion then there is disagreement.That's part of life, no pun intended.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
jar writes:
Well of course you are wrong and the scientific and legal consensus is that human life begins around the third trimester. Even at that point there may not be human life. I don't think that is the consensus of the scientific community from the papers I have read.As for the legal aspect the court is talking about viability not the beginning of human life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
JonF writes:
Nothing there about eliminating any human lives. Is it Planned Parenthood's position that life begins at birth? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Straggler writes:
Do you accept 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. Can you link me to information supporting those statements?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2964 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
bluegenes writes:
A biologist who insisted on calling a fertilized egg a chicken should probably be sacked. You didn't answer the question. Are you a qualified biologist with the biological knowledge to refute her scientific statements? Do you refute her qualifications? By the way you can google her and review her CV.
bluegenes writes:
I can read English, and so can you. Read the paper again. Do you seriously consider a pre-solar nebula to be a solar system? Do you consider a caterpillar to be a butterfly? Do you consider the first European colonies established in North America to be a country called the United States of America? I did not see in her paper anything about the solar system, caterpillars or european colonies.She wrote a paper on the biolgical scientific evidence of when human life begins. Can you refute her SCIENCE?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024