Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who determines "unwanted"? Thats a dangerous factor to be considering who lives and who dies.
And no, we do not factor "unwanted" into wartime. Where did you get that idea? Maybe you can explain a situation where we do use "unwanted" as a factor, because I can think of none.
Apparently, the enemy is the "unwanted" whether they're in uniform or not.
There are two principle aspects of the Law of Biogenesis, one being that life comes from life; it does not come from non-life, and each being reproduces after its own kind.
Only in the world of fundie religion that you are now rather evidently seen as being a conniving and dishonest emissary of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
Is this logic so ridiculous and so outlandish or is it just plain common sense? Does anyone really need a scienticist to tell them that two human parents cannot create a dog or cat, but only a human baby? It's not that difficult to see or understand.
It's not that difficult to see or understand that fundies adulterate science by adding their little second part out of their dogmatic hatred for evolution. In the not so long ago past, your direct ancestors were NOT human beings, yet you are. Explain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
Yes, for the first several weeks, it doesn't look like a human right away, but DNA on the other hand gives us unmistakeable evidence telling us what kind of being any living thing is. One looking at a row of 10 zygotes wouldn't know which was human by simply looking, but its DNA would tell us without a shadow of doubt which one was human.
Everyone already recognizes that a zygote is a living cell of human origin. You are arguing a point that is not in contention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
It's also not difficult to see that at the moment of conception, something new has been created.
First of all, there is no 'moment of conception'. Conception is a process as well. Second of all, nothing new has been created. Their is no magic wand. You may stir a spoonful of chocolate syrup into a glass of milk to make chocolate milk, but there is nothing but milk and chocolate to be found within the glass. There is nothing new here at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
A human father puts forth 23 chromosomes which unites with the mothers egg that contains 23 chromosomes, creating a zygote with--guess what--46 chromosomes. Not all the chromosomes of the mother, not all the chromosomes of the father, but a unique chromosomal match. In other words, at that point, by scientific assessment, we have a living thing that does not have the chromosomal makeup of either of his parents, but a combination of the two. In other words, it has its own unique chromosomal pattern of 46 chromosomes that are its own as a living being. That's how we know the zygote is not mom and is not dad. It is something different and it is alive, yes living in mom, sure enough, but a separate living entity.
Hmmm. Living cells of human origin with a genetic signature distinct from that of its host. You have described a transplanted kidney.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
It is a living human being.
Uh-oh. Leap of faith alert.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOJOG
Please, I ask again, what would you label an unborn baby? What is it and when does it become a person in your eyes? And most importantly, what is the difference between a human being and a person?
The term 'unborn baby' is an oxymoronic, value-laden, code-word to begin with. A zygote-blastocyst-embryo-fetus is an unborn baby in the same sense that you and I are undead corpses. But right-to-lifers must resort to such transparent appeals to emotion because it is only on emotional grounds that they can hope to make any progress at all. The facts are all against them.
With respect to abortion, for instance, it is not necessary to define this precise point that you seek. The only determination actually necessary is that, wherever that point might be, it hasn't arrived yet.
As to the independent matter of picking one point from among millions in the reproductive process at which to conclude that a new and separate being worthy of full individual rights has come into existence, the task has never been accomplished nor is it even undertaken in this society. Instead, we respect the fact of process by assigning rights progressively. A very few rights are extended at birth. Others come later, as a capacity to comprehend and carry them out is evidenced. Even by the age of ten years, a child cannot drive, vote, order a beer, sign a contract, be held liable, purchase a gun, sue or be sued, skip school...the list goes on and on. And the point of it, again, is respect for the fact of process. Is birth an appropriate moment at which to begin the process of extending rights? Probably not. As none beyond it has any recollection at all of events prior to the age of about two years, the second anniversary of birth might make more sense as a start point than the date of birth itself. Some societies have chosen such a point. No society has ever chosen the 'moment of conception', nor is there anything but religious dogma to suggest that they should.
Let me ask you this then. If we can't depend on science considering things change and one thing could be proven one day and then disproven the next...
This is why science IS dependable. It is progressive, cumulative, and self-correcting. Compare and contrast to religious dogma that is based on ancient non-science and then assumed to be fixed and immutable for all time. Which do you think is the better model for the discovery of truth?
There is overwhelming consensus among scientists who have no vested interest in the abortion issue that human life begins at conception. Every single one of these sources are secular! There is no religious belief involved, as their conclusions are based squarely on scientific and medical facts!!!
Dr. Bradley M Patten states in Human Embryology, "It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."
Dr. Keith L Moore- when referring to the single-cell zygote states, "The cell results from fertilization of an ooctye by a sperm and is the beginning of human life."
Dr.'s J.P Greenhill and E.A. Freidman in their works on biology and obsteterics state, "The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."
Dr. Louis Fridhandler in medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as "that wonderous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual."
Dr.'s E.I Potter and J.M Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, "Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."
Many other popular scientific reference works reflect this same understanding of when human life begins. Time and Rand McNally's Atlas of the Body states, "In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual. In the Encyclopedia Britannica, one will read "A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg."
Experts that testified in front of the U.S. Senate that human life begins at conception:
Professor Hymie Gordon from the Mayo Clinic: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."
Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: "It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisiv... It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception...Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data."
Dr. Alfred M Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the U of Penn.: I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...human life is present throughout the entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life....I am no more prepared to say that these early states of development in the womb represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty is not a human being. This is human life at every stage."
Dr. Watson A Bowes, U of Colorado Medical School: "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological view a simple and straightforward matter- the beginning is conception. This straightfoward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals."
SHALL I KEEP GOING???? HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION! THIS IS NOT RELIGIOUS DOGMA, THIS IS SCIENTIFIC FACT!
There is overwhelming consensus among scientists who have no vested interest in the abortion issue that human life begins at conception. Every single one of these sources are secular! There is no religious belief involved, as their conclusions are based squarely on scientific and medical facts!!!
Thank you.
Now, you realize that some will try to debunk these Drs as being "fundies" (whatever that means) or other such words?
Okay, so you have determined that an unborn baby becomes a human when it's able to breath, filter and process food, which doesn't happen until birth. So basically, a magical little trip down the birth canal will suddenly transform this non-human thing into a human being. Never mind that her DNA confirms she's human from the get go, never mind that her parents are human, which also confirms she is human from the get go. What makes her a human is her little venture down a 6 inch birth canal. Boy, that's some logic!
Hmmm. Exactly as predicted. The logic you now wish to deride is exactly that which you earlier employed in suggesting that two seconds before conception there is not 'a person', while two seconds afterward, there is. Is life any easier when freed from the bonds of logical consistency?
SHALL I KEEP GOING???? HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION! THIS IS NOT RELIGIOUS DOGMA, THIS IS SCIENTIFIC FACT!
We can agree that a life begins at conception. It's the point where it becomes human that we do not agree on. Just because it's genetics are identical to that of you or I doesn't make it human.
Again, I will reference the caterpillar to butterfly analogy. Two different species within one lifespan. Same DNA.
Hmmm. Exactly as predicted. The logic you now wish to deride is exactly that which you earlier employed in suggesting that two seconds before conception there is not 'a person', while two seconds afterward, there is. Is life any easier when freed from the bonds of logical consistency?
WE'LL TRY ONE MORE TIME! LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION. AND YES, ONE MOMENT THERE WAS NO PERSON, BUT ONCE THE SPERM AND EGG FUSE TOGETHER, THERE IS NOW A LIFE! YOU DON'T KNOW MORE THAN EDUCATED AND QUALIFIED SCIENTISTS AND DOCTORS! YOU MY FRIEND ARE THE ONE WHO IS ILLOGICAL! YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THE TRUTH YOU SIMPLY LIKE TO HEAR YOURSELF SPEW! I AM DONE ENGAGING WITH YOU!
There is overwhelming consensus among scientists who have no vested interest in the abortion issue that human life begins at conception. Every single one of these sources are secular! There is no religious belief involved, as their conclusions are based squarely on scientific and medical facts!!!
Dr. Bradley M Patten states in Human Embryology, "It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."
Dr. Keith L Moore- when referring to the single-cell zygote states, "The cell results from fertilization of an ooctye by a sperm and is the beginning of human life."
Dr.'s J.P Greenhill and E.A. Freidman in their works on biology and obsteterics state, "The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."
Dr. Louis Fridhandler in medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as "that wonderous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual."
Dr.'s E.I Potter and J.M Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, "Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."
Many other popular scientific reference works reflect this same understanding of when human life begins. Time and Rand McNally's Atlas of the Body states, "In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual. In the Encyclopedia Britannica, one will read "A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg."
Experts that testified in front of the U.S. Senate that human life begins at conception:
Professor Hymie Gordon from the Mayo Clinic: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."
Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: "It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisiv... It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception...Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data."
Dr. Alfred M Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the U of Penn.: I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...human life is present throughout the entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life....I am no more prepared to say that these early states of development in the womb represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty is not a human being. This is human life at every stage."
Dr. Watson A Bowes, U of Colorado Medical School: "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological view a simple and straightforward matter- the beginning is conception. This straightfoward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals."
SHALL I KEEP GOING???? HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION! THIS IS NOT RELIGIOUS DOGMA, THIS IS SCIENTIFIC FACT!
We are not at the top of the evolutionary ladder because we are particularly "special" and have some sort of intrinsic value above and beyond that of any other life form. If anything, our "worth" has caused us to believe that it is some how our "right" to decimate this planet, selfishly squandering its natural resources, while ensuring that some future generation will find itself unable to support its overpopulated world, simply because we imagine that some omnipotent god has given "man" dominion over all the Earth. Some day, the Earth will rebel at its abuse at the hands of man--we are, after all, our own worse enemy. Humankind, with its arrogant misuse of the Earth's resources, will all but guarantee its own destruction, leaving the Earth to the flora and fauna. I venture to say that with none of our own kind around to admire our accomplishments, humankind will fade away into obscurity.
Very well put. The Earth got by without us for billions of years, and it will eventually have the opportunity of doing so again. All the God Hypothesis has thusfar managed to do is to hasten the day of that eventuality.
We can agree that a life begins at conception. It's the point where it becomes human that we do not agree on. Just because it's genetics are identical to that of you or I doesn't make it human.
Again, I will reference the caterpillar to butterfly analogy. Two different species within one lifespan. Same DNA.
CHECK OUT THE OVERWHELMING USE OF THE WORDING "HUMAN" LIFE! IT CANNOT BE ANYTHING BUT HUMAN IF IT'S PARENTS ARE HUMAN! IT'S DNA WILL TELL YOU IT'S IS HUMAN!
There is overwhelming consensus among scientists who have no vested interest in the abortion issue that human life begins at conception. Every single one of these sources are secular! There is no religious belief involved, as their conclusions are based squarely on scientific and medical facts!!!
Dr. Bradley M Patten states in Human Embryology, "It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."
Dr. Keith L Moore- when referring to the single-cell zygote states, "The cell results from fertilization of an ooctye by a sperm and is the beginning of human life."
Dr.'s J.P Greenhill and E.A. Freidman in their works on biology and obsteterics state, "The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."
Dr. Louis Fridhandler in medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as "that wonderous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual."
Dr.'s E.I Potter and J.M Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, "Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."
Many other popular scientific reference works reflect this same understanding of when human life begins. Time and Rand McNally's Atlas of the Body states, "In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual. In the Encyclopedia Britannica, one will read "A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg."
Experts that testified in front of the U.S. Senate that human life begins at conception:
Professor Hymie Gordon from the Mayo Clinic: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."
Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: "It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisiv... It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception...Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data."
Dr. Alfred M Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the U of Penn.: I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...human life is present throughout the entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life....I am no more prepared to say that these early states of development in the womb represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty is not a human being. This is human life at every stage."
Dr. Watson A Bowes, U of Colorado Medical School: "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological view a simple and straightforward matter- the beginning is conception. This straightfoward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals."
SHALL I KEEP GOING???? HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION! THIS IS NOT RELIGIOUS DOGMA, THIS IS SCIENTIFIC FACT!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
