So much of the argument around abortion centres on “what is it to be human”. Where do we draw the line? Does “life” start at fertilisation? Implantation? Birth? Complicating this is that science is moving forward and research is progressing on stem cells and the formation of Organoids and Embryoids. Organoids are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ...iaturised,biological complexity of that organ. So, who cares if we start growing kidneys and lungs right? I mean it is not as if they are “human”. Except - they are not all kidneys and lungs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ...iaturised,biological complexity of that organ. Embryoids are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryoid_body You will find more information on the ethics of research into this here https://www.isscr.org/guidelines https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00656-x?utm_source=Live+Audience&utm_campaign=266f294882-briefing-dy-20240305&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b27a691814-266f294882-51847612
The science has long ago answered the question why do you ignore the science? https://www.epm.org/resources/2011/Apr/27/when-does-life-begin-quotes-many-sources/ From medical textbooks: What do the scientists who are most familiar with genetics and embryology say? The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 199, 2-18: "[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm ... unites with a female gamete or oocyte ... to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." From Human Embryology & Teratology, Ronan R. O'Rahilly, Fabiola Muller, (New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996), 5-55: "Fertilization is an important landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed... Fertilization is the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments... The zygote ... is a unicellular embryo.." Essentials of Human Embryology, William J. Larsen, (New York: Churchill Livingstone, 199, 1-17: "In this text, we begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual. ... Fertilization takes place in the oviduct ... resulting in the formation of a zygote containing a single diploid nucleus. Embryonic development is considered to begin at this point... This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development." Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 196, 43: "It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and 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." Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2: (updated, still the same) "Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)." Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2: "[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being." J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics (Philadelphia: W.B. Sanders, 1974), 17: "The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life." Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Miller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8: "Although life is a continuous process, fertilization... is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte." William J. Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998. pp. 1, 14: "Human embryos begin development following the fusion of definitive male and female gametes during fertilization... This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development." Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3: "The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3d ed. (Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975), vii: "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." Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974: "In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun." Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986: "...but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before - at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by..." Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3: "Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual." Turner, J.S., and Helms, D.B., Lifespan Developmental, 2nd ed., CBS College Publishing (Holt, Rhinehart, Winston), 1983, page 53: "A zygote (a single fertilized egg cell) represents the onset of pregnancy and the genesis of new life." Clark, J. ed., The Nervous System: Circuits of Communication in the Human Body, Torstar Books Inc., Toronto, 1985, page 99: "Each human begins life as a combination of two cells, a female ovum and a much smaller male sperm. This tiny unit, no bigger than a period on this page, contains all the information needed to enable it to grow into the complex ...structure of the human body. The mother has only to provide nutrition and protection." Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419: "The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual." DeCoursey, R.M., The Human Organism, 4th edition McGraw Hill Inc., Toronto, 1974. page 584: "The zygote therefore contains a new arrangement of genes on the chromosomes never before duplicated in any other individual. The offspring destined to develop from the fertilized ovum will have a genetic constitution different from anyone else in the world." In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005 (Prenatal Development Video): "The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual's unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated." The Biology of Prenatal Development, National Geographic, 2006. (Video): "Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization." Encyclopedia Britannica, "Pregnancy," page 968, 15th Edition. Chicago 1974: "A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg." Leslie Brainerd Arey, "Developmental Anatomy" seventh edition (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55: "The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization." From scientists: From California Medicine 113, no.3 (1970), reprinted in The Human Life Review 1, no.1 (1975): 103-4: "...since the old ethic has not been fully displaced it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but taking a human life would be ludicrous if they were not often put forth under socially impeccable auspices. It is suggested that this schizophrenic sort of subterfuge is necessary because while a new ethic is being accepted the old one has not yet been rejected." "...each of us has a unique beginning, the moment of conception...As soon as the twenty-three chromosomes carried by the sperm encounter the twenty-three chromosomes carried by the ovum, the whole information necessary and sufficient to spell out all the characteristics of the new being is gathered...(W)hen this information carried by the sperm and by the ovum has encountered each other, then a new human being is defined which has never occurred before and will never occur again...[the zygote, and the cells produced in the succeeding divisions] is not just simply a non-descript cell, or a "population" or loose "collection" of cells, but a very specialized individual, i.e., someone who will build himself according to his own rule." (As quoted in Linacre Quarterly, February, 1993) And I have not even touch on the international science which only reiterates the above. So do you follow the science or the laymans fallacious semantics in order to justify support for mothers killing their unborn babies?
Considering we were all a cluster of cells once, it doesn’t matter what is considered a human. The only issue is how much power we allow government to impose these beliefs on others. I say it’s none of the government’s business, but many support government imposing vaccines, masks, gun laws, and excessive taxes.
You are a "cluster" of cells now as much as an embryo is a "cluster" of cells. It is the duty of the government to protect each of our right to our lives very much it's business. But then that is not the issue here.
I respect your belief and even agree. I strongly oppose using government to impose these beliefs on others. Next thing you know, we will have to take pharma products and give up our firearms.
Should the law follow the science or should should everyone just be able to make up what they want? What if the mother opposes the government imposing a belief the once the baby is born she can no longer kill it even if she does not want it to live anymore?
While I may agree with you on abortion, there is no way to enforce abortion laws, so they have no benefit to society. If I gave you unlimited resources, how would you address abortion drugs, DIY abortions, and medical tourism?
We don't stop all murder and rape and robbery and assault either with our laws so should we abandon them too. I think the citizens of each state should make those decisions so medical tourism is a moot point we can't stop people from travel to other states and one states laws do not extend beyond borders. Drugs that prevent a woman from becoming fertile in the first place are widely available as extended, monthly, once a day prescriptions. Even morning after pills which will prevent a pregnancy by keeping the woman infertile during her cycle. Even victims of a rape, that extremely rare stated reason for obtaining an abortion, can insure they will not become pregnant. I would like that to be it except for the other so extreme as to be almost non-existent life of the mother. I mean if the mother is going to die the baby is going to die. In reality I think the best shot is for a 15 week ban and what the Reps should be running on.
We get stuck on the belief that a pregnancy ends with a beautiful healthy baby. That is NOT always the case. The result of a birth can be absent the requirements for life beyond minutes or days. It can include pain and struggle to death. `Using extreme measures to extend that period of pain and struggle is something that many would not want to do. These cases include heartbreaking decisions that are only made more difficult by legislatures and prosecutors. Plus, the idea that a woman who carried a healthy fetus to term would then want to KILL, and that a doctor would comply is absolutely absurd - it's no more than an insult against women and doctors everywhere.
But that's not science. That's just the subjective and obviously incorrect opinions of a few people. Since they're wrong, who cares? An unfertilized egg can clearly develop into a human. It is indisputably human life, a stage of human life which develops into a person. Thus, anylone claiming that a zygote is the beginning of life is totally and hilariously wrong. Science and logic say your position is wrong, therefore your position is wrong. That's true no matter how many times you repeat your entirely subjective and unsupportable opinion, or how many times you repeat someone else saying it.
MSG# 2 Why did you just state I did not support my position? I see NOTHING in your post supporting your fallaciously stated layman's uninformed statement of fact. No that IS the science as I cited from the SCIENCE AND MEDICAL TEXTBOOKS. An egg, ovum is NOT to be precise a human life, it is a gamete of another human being. An ovum is NOT a zygote which is a complete and unique human being at the zygote stage of life. The human being does not exist UNTIL there is conception and fertilization and from that moment on is is a human being. That is the SCIENCE not opinion.
Can you show me this idea of what science says is a beautiful baby and how we apply that measure? Isn't that what the Nazi doctors did in order to exterminate those they deemed not beautiful? Certainly not impossible and we have moved from abortion should only be in the most dire circumstances to manner of birth control with the pro-abortion side support up to the moment of birth. They me what is the difference between a baby a minuter from birth and a baby a minute after birth that one can be killed simply because the mother wants it kill but the other not? And don't put so much faith in each and every doctor out there as we have found out in the past there are MONSTERS out there.
And although “human” begins at fertilisation a fertilised egg is not guaranteed to become a human. Some fail to implant, some naturally abort due to multiple environmental factors more abort though either genetic anomaly or through failure of the developmental process and some become hydatitiform moles. So you still haven’t answered the question - are organoids and Embryoids “human”. They are made from human cells, have human genetic material so how do these differ from your fertilised eggs?
Because you didn't. What you did is like a flat earther quoting other flat earthers. And they were plainly wrong. Appeal-to-authority doesn't work when your authorities are being stupid. Because you say so? That does seem to be your only argument. It's human. It's alive. It can develop into a human being. Exactly the same as a zygote. Thus, anyone claming life begins at conception is babbling nonsense, being that life was clearly present with an ovum. "BECAUSE I SAY SO! BECAUSE I SAY SO! BECAUSE I SAY SO!" When it's all you've got, I guess it's all you've got. "BECAUSE I SAY SO! BECAUSE I SAY SO! BECAUSE I SAY SO!" It's entirely your subjective opinion. Pretending otherwise doesn't make your position any less subjective.
And the basis of you assertion the science and medical textbooks are wrong is what exactly? Because the science as I showed you says so and teaches so. I'll try to help you out again When Human Life Begins American College of Pediatricians – March 2017 ABSTRACT: The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is one of form, not nature. This statement focuses on the scientific evidence of when an individual human life begins. ..Some embryologists consider fertilization a day-long process and regard the beginning of human life as occurring near the end of this process at syngamy,1,18,21 whereas others consider the time of cell membrane fusion when the embryo gives evidence of being a different kind of cell than either oocyte or sperm, to be the beginning of a new human life, since within minutes the new embryo acts to prevent the merger of another sperm with itself and starts the business of self-replication. The single-celled embryo is a very different kind of cell than that of sperm or oocyte, and contains a unique genome that will determine most future bodily features and functions of his or her lifetime. An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole, and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.”22 It is clear that from the time of cell fusion, the embryo consists of elements (from both maternal and paternal origin) which function interdependently in a coordinated manner to carry on the function of the development of the human organism. From this definition, the single-celled embryo is not just a cell, but an organism, a living being, a human being. The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that corroborates that a unique human life starts when the sperm and egg bind to each other in a process of fusion of their respective membranes and a single hybrid cell called a zygote, or one-cell embryo, is created." https://acpeds.org/position-statements/when-human-life-begins And more to the point of why the pro-abortion side must dehumanize the victims of their policies Are Human Embryos Human Beings? Whether human embryos are human beings is a question resolved by human embryology and developmental biology. Among the constants in human history is this: When people want to justify killing, enslaving, or otherwise abusing a class of their fellow human beings, they first dehumanize them. I suspect that the dehumanization of the victims is typically meant not only to persuade others to go along or look the other way; it is also to convince the dehumanizers themselves. As a matter of scientifically demonstrable fact, human embryos, no less than human fetuses, infants, toddlers, children, adolescents, and adults, are human beings — living members of the species Homo sapiens. Those words — “embryo,” “infant,” “adolescent,” and so forth — do not name different kinds of entities. They name the same kind of entity (a living member of the human species, a human being, like you or me) at different stages of development. But some today, for various reasons, want to justify the deliberate killing of human beings at early stages of their development — the embryonic, fetal, even infant stages. And some want to justify the deliberate killing of people in certain conditions — those suffering, for example, from cognitive disabilities or severe dementias. So, as usual, they are at pains to deny that the victims are human. They insist that those of whom they want to license the killing are “nonhuman,” or “subhuman,” or “prehuman,” or “not fully human,” or whatever. https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/03/are-human-embryos-human-beings/ Anyone stating an ovum is a human life only demonstrates how uninformed they are when it comes to the science. Yes I know that is the only argument you have while I have the science on my side. When it's all you've got, I guess it's all you've got. I have cited the objective science you have posting nothing but your fallacious subjective opinion.
I have no obligation to do so I pay for my own medications. Are you donating to groups who fund them for poor women? Why should I have to fund others peoples sexual intercourse?
Birth of parthenogenetic mice that can develop to adulthood https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15103378/ It seems likely that a human adult can also be produced from an ovum without fertilization by a male gamete.
I don't think so at all. You said So we kill the babies who are not beautiful and healthy? Can you show me this idea of what science says is a beautiful baby and how we apply that measure? Isn't that what the Nazi doctors did in order to exterminate those they deemed not beautiful? There are MONSTER doctors out there who have and would do such horrible acts but I asked you a question. What is the difference in the physicallity and the humanity of a baby a minute before birth and them a minute after. What magically happens to turn it into a human being with a right lift during that brief 6" journey from the womb to the hospital bed?
ROFL once an ovum is fertilized it is no longer an ovum, it is not a fertilzed ovum it is a zygote. And do tell me when science has ever shown that the organism created by the union of a human sperm and a human ovum became something other than a human. And they do so as human beings. You have not asked that question where you speciously conflate organoid tissues with embyros. I have explained the difference between cells which are parts of an organism and the organism itself which is made up of billions of specialized cells starting with the very first one.
They say life begins at concpetion, even though life clearly existed before conception. Thus, they are clearly and laughably wrong. It's not difficult. Why are you having such a tough time with it? It's trivial to prove that conception has nothing to do with personhood. Long before humanity knew what conception was, we knew what a person was. Hence, that proves conception has nothing to do with it. Who do you think you are, to say that all of humanity over all of human history was wrong? Your arrogance and narcissism seems off-the-scale. If you're going to enslave half the population, you need more justification than "BECAUSE I SAY SO! YOU MUST OBEY ME!". So far, that's all you've given us.
You're still talking about healthy babies, not babies with serious congenital abnormalities. The reason for allowing natural birth to dead fetuses or fetuses with serious congenital abnormalities is that at that stage, natural birth can be preferred - for health reasons and/or the woman's choice. You're still stuck on this idea that all women and all embryos have rosy outcomes.
Only potentially a human. Between 40 - 70% fail Human tissue yes but not “human beings” and none of your quotes call an embryo a “human being”. A term that implies independence of thought and action https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3814511/ https://www.bbcearth.com/news/what-does-it-mean-to-be-human Even the most pro life stances do not consider a fertilised egg as a “human” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar...ly accepted opinion,of view, as an individual. Go back re read the OP it was the premise of the entire thread
