It's obvious Abortion is wrong

It is a human person when it acquires the genetic material of a homo sapien - i.e., a fertilized egg. I do not need a quote and a link, I can think on my own without being told what to think.

The rest of your post deals with a different subject - the quality of life under unique circumstances. Comparing a person who is severely debilitated and will never recover (Terry Schiavo) to a normal preborn baby who will continue to mature into a fully capable adult (and will meet every one of your conditions) is an incorrect comparison.

 

A single cell is a person, got it.

 

Wrong definition because it covers too much: "It is a human person when it acquires the genetic material of a homo sapien - i.e., a fertilized egg." That includes tonsils which can be removed and discarded (but you would define them as persons because they acquired the genetic material of a homo sapiens). Try again.

 

A Homosapien is so much more than it's DNA, the classification of a species falls under taxonomy and I'm afraid a single human cell does not met the criteria.

View attachment 45349

ie there is no homosapien at conception.

 

The other issue that people like Battle3 will not address is that until differentiation every cell is a clone of the original, so according to his ideology there are in the region of 200 "persons" until differentiation takes place (usual around four days after fertilization) furthermore once differentiation has taken place some of those cells will become the placenta .. so again according to Battle3's ideology there are only two options a) the placenta is a person b) the cells that will become the placenta are persons until differentiation, they then lose that status ... I wonder if Battle3 can cite any other situation where a person ceases to become a person, but as he/she is ignoring me I doubt there will ever be an answer to these difficult questions (I call it evading)

 

""""It is a human person when it acquires the genetic material of a homo sapien""""

Good, then I'm saving all the hair I have cut, my finger nail clippings, roll them all together , tie them with string and I'll have a person who can vote with me in the fall.. . another vote against Trump....(because hair and fingernails are too smart to vote for him)

 

Just what? How is that in anyway related to what I just said? Someone dug up an old post saying how pro life people are on the decline and I responded.

The pro abortion crowd has been on a downward trend since 1995. Read the chart.

 

No, it proves you wrong. Since 1995 the pro abortion crowd hasn't had the same numbers. On the other hand the pro life crowd has been on a steady increase.

 

I did. You look at the chart.

- - - Updated - - -

A fertilized human egg is a person.

 

A fertilized human egg is a single cell, Biology 101.

 

The chart shows the percentage of prochoice people increasing and the percentage of antichoice people decreasing. If you don't agree, perhaps you should take a remedial math course.

Incorrect, but that's nothing new with you.

 

Don't give up your day job because reading charts is not your strong suit.

For starters Gallup panders to the extreme right so that poll is dubious at best.

Secondly you are imagining "trends" that don't exist because the fluctuations expose a large range of data points that suddenly started right after Gallup was exposed as defrauding the Federal government and forced to pay massive fines.

In essence you are relying on something with zero credibility.

 

BZZZT Wrong!

A fertilized human egg contains the DNA of two existing persons.

It does NOT have any unique DNA of it's own at that point in time.

FYI cells with human DNA are discarded all the time. You shed about 400,000 skin cells every day that contained human DNA when they were alive. Does that make those discarded cells "persons" under your definition?

 

If I remember my college biology correctly, once the egg is fertilized and the crossing over occurs, the fertilized egg is a complete cell with 23 pairs of chromosomes and unique DNA.

 

So? Abortion is still legal and most Americans want it that way........and even if illegal it would continue...Anti-Choicers lose either way


Your charting reading/evaluating skills are non-existent.

 

Tonsils will not develop through the stages of a human being. The fertilized egg will.

You don't like my answer, no surprise since every post you present is an attempt to get me to play in your little box in which only your beliefs will fit.

 

You refined your answer, so that is progress. Now we know that you define a person as an organism with human DNA that will eventually become a person (unlike tonsils which can never become a person). Now the big problem is that you cannot define a thing to be what is potentially will be. For example, every fertilized egg... even if given every possible advantage... will eventually die. Does that mean we can call the zef dead because it will eventually become dead? No. Therefore, we cannot call the zef a person just because it may potentially become a person.

In order to define what a person is, most people describe elements of the mind. How do you define what is already an actual person?

 

Actually it probably is possible to make a person out of any human cell via induced totipotency. The main difference is that science hasn't caught up with the sophistication of the woman's body, but we will.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_stem_cells

 

I did, you obviously didn't.

 

The period after fertilization/conception and before cleavage/cell division is when the unique DNA is formed. Normally it happens within the first 12 hours after conception but it is a fallacy to claim that unique DNA is formed at the time of conception.

 

The reason I gave such a flippant answer is because you - as you have done in all your posts including this one - have misrepresented my position, and constantly try to impose your rules and thinking upon me. I do not follow your restrictions. When you can step outside your little box, then I will possibly rejoin this so-far pointless discussion.

 

Thinking outside the box... If we are visited by intelligent creatures from outer space, do we consider them "persons" because of their minds, or reject them as "persons" because they do not have human DNA?

 

This is not about alien creatures, or chimpanzees, or whales, or any other entity that may or may not be intelligent and deserve special status. This is about the determination of when a human being becomes a person. Everyone recognizes that a human being is at some point a "person", the question is the identification of that moment when it is a person.

You are stuck on using brain development as the criteria, I completely reject that approach. It does not matter how you frame your criteria, I still reject it.

Think of it in terms of the oak tree. An acorn is not a tree in structure, but it will become one, it is a different stage of the development of an oak. Same with the fertilized human egg.

 

So if a squirrel eats an acorn did it murder an oak tree??

 

Since an oak tree is not a human being, it did not "murder". All it did was to eat an early stage oak.