Quote:
|
Quote by: Technosoul I would also question what people think of as "life" per-say. Is a sperm a human being? It seems to be alive because it can swim and that is before conception. So the real question might be when does human life start? We have the sperm and then the sperm knew the egg - then a anonymous stem cell which matures during and evolutionary process in the womb, passing through stages where it looks like a fish with gills, then like a small animal with a tail, then little by little takes shape as a human baby. Does a human being have gills and/or a tail? And so you see that it does not evolve into a human being until after a few months of evolutionary changes within the womb. "It" being used generically as a term for life before human life.
Now the anti-abortionist would debate that it is all part of a process that in fact will become a human being and once the process is started then we have the moral responsiblity not to abort the life developing - even if it has no human rights until after birth. For example if the stem cell is a human at the moment following conception then it should be issued a "conception certificate" so that it will belong to the country where the conception took place, not where it was (is) born. (with a birth certifitcate) - which certifiticate in turn gives life form it's rights relative the country where it orginated. Needless to say stem cells are not given certificates of conception and so have no real rights under any country because they cannot be an American or whatever until birth. And so also we should not count chickens until the hatch.
Now that life process started long before the one child in question was born, life started thousands of years ago as far of this human strand goes. The most important part of that process for continued reproductive life is the sex drive which becomes dominate from the teens on up. So if you tell young people who are old enough to be reproductive not to have sex at all until married then you are aborting the natual processes of reproductive life and thus the baby human that might have been born to that highschool mom will never see the light of day.... so using will power not to have sex to avoid having children is an abortion of the life process that would result as a human being of the next generaiton. So life did not start with conception but with the first human couple at the beginning of the process and or via some evolutionary pre-human speices.
So it must have the complete appearence of the physical human and in addition the self consciousness of being "I Am". And most experts would agree what it must be independant of the mother so that the individual can breathe and take food as a seperate identity.
Technosoul |
For all the talk, you seem to have little, if any grasp of basic developmental biology. Or perhaps you do, but prefer to cast smoke screens in order to hide the truth. In either case, you have made no case.
First, sperm and eggs. This one is so old and tired that the pro choice movement should send a memo out suggesting that it not be used as it is quite easily torn down, and exposes a profound lack of knowledge in the subject of human biology on the part of any who use it.
Sperm and eggs. Are you male or female? If you have sperm they are cells from your body. Alone, they are of no more consequence than your fingernail clippings. They are cells that are produced by your body. Any 2nd year bio student could positively identify them as belonging to you via a simple DNA test. Ditto if you have eggs. These cells are unique in that they only have one half of a set of chromosomes, and as such represent potential life, but alone they are just your cells. They grow and are either used, or, in the case of males, reabsorbed, or in the case of females, sluffed off.
BUT..Once they get together and each contribute their half set of chromosomes, then both sperm and egg cease to exist, their potential is realized a new DNA fingerprint is formed and a new human being is growing. A new individual's life has begun in that very moment. You can trace your own existence back exactly that far, one moment further and you would not exist and your life has continued, uninterrupted till this moment. You would be quite unable to demonstrate in any real way that your life did not begin at the moment of your conception.
Each of the stages of your development have been nothing more than the stages of your development. At any time and at any stage, your DNA would have identified you as a human being. You are very different today than you were the day you were born, but you are no more human. And you were very different on the day that you were born than you were at the moment of your conception, but you were no more human by virtue of your passing down 7 inches of birth canal. If you live to be 150, you will not become more human by virtue of your age than you were when you were concieved.
Pick a stage of development. You will find, with just a little research, that at any stage of development, that a human looks just as a human is supposed to look at that stage. Your suggestion that it does not "evolve" into a "human being" suggests that you are not able to wrap your mind around the idea that humans go through stages of development but are still humans even though they may not be wearing levis and a T shirt.
I don't quite get your reference to "stem" cells, as if conception produced a stem cell. You need to brush up a bit on your basic biology there.
And ID? You believe that you must hold a paper in your had that proclaims your citizenship in order to be a human being? What biology book did you get that from. In the US, ALL human beings have an inalienable right to life. The founders didn't suggest that all human beings that were at least 9 months of age had that right, they said ALL humans. Are you able to demonstrate in some real way that the offspring of two human beings is something other than human?
And the "life process"...What a hoot. It is clear that we are talking about an individual, and not a species. You as an individual can follow your life back to the moment of your conception and not a moment further. And because of that, science clearly states that a human being's life begins at the moment of conception.
So, at any stage of development, it has the "appearance" of a human being at that stage of development. And the self aware "I am" doesn't happen until 15 months or so post birth so lets toss that one out as meaningless as well. And no experts agree that dependence makes any of us less human so out with that little error as well. It would seem that for all your writing, you didn't get a single biological fact right. You just talked and didn't offer up a single thing that could be considered evidence to support your opinion.
Maybe you can provide a bibliographical reference to a medical textbook or two that suggests that a human being's life doesn't start at the moment of conception. Or maybe some reference to a scientific text that suggests that the offspring of two human beings is some species other than human until it "looks" like a human being to you. Maybe anything to support anything that you have said?