Does life begin at conception? I think it does.

[Jinei]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy Why should it? How does the number of chromosomes something has relate in any way to its social standing? In order to decide what we should consider human life, you need to think why we value human life in the first place. It’s not for the number of chromosomes we have.

EXATLY! I think it's a the live, human brain throbbing with the complex business of human life. If anything, that's what we vaue most, as that is where personhood begins. To place personhood on a 2 second-year-old zygote would be ridiculous.

[Baarst]

Quote by: The Bacon Guy View Post
Why should it? How does the number of chromosomes something has relate in any way to its social standing? In order to decide what we should consider human life, you need to think why we value human life in the first place. It’s not for the number of chromosomes we have.
EXATLY! I think it's a the live, human brain throbbing with the complex business of human life. If anything, that's what we vaue most, as that is where personhood begins. To place personhood on a 2 second-year-old zygote would be ridiculous.

The question is does life begin at conception, not personhood....whatever the f*** that means, i believe life does begin at conception because that is when the cells start dividing, at conception it is certainly not sentient life but living non the less, whether anyone has the right to terminate this process at this early stage is a whole different issue.

[Jinei]

Quote by: Baarst The question is does life begin at conception, not personhood....whatever the f*** that means, i believe life does begin at conception because that is when the cells start dividing, at conception it is certainly not sentient life but living non the less, whether anyone has the right to terminate this process at this early stage is a whole different issue.

Dude, that is the issue here. No one will doubt that the zygote is alive. I don't think there's any meaningful debate there. btw, I define person hood as the sentient life you mentioned. That's why I think the question ought to be "does personhood/sentient life begine at conception"

[JaneDoe321]

Quote by: Baarst Quote by: The Bacon Guy View Post Why should it? How does the number of chromosomes something has relate in any way to its social standing? In order to decide what we should consider human life, you need to think why we value human life in the first place. It’s not for the number of chromosomes we have. EXATLY! I think it's a the live, human brain throbbing with the complex business of human life. If anything, that's what we vaue most, as that is where personhood begins. To place personhood on a 2 second-year-old zygote would be ridiculous. The question is does life begin at conception, not personhood....whatever the f*** that means, i believe life does begin at conception because that is when the cells start dividing, at conception it is certainly not sentient life but living non the less, whether anyone has the right to terminate this process at this early stage is a whole different issue.

"life" is not inherently worth saving. Tumors are "alive" and we kill them allllllll the time and hardly anybody aside from some very very fundamentalist religions have a dang thing negative to say about that.

[Jinei]

Quote by: JaneDoe321 "life" is not inherently worth saving. Tumors are "alive" and we kill them allllllll the time and hardly anybody aside from some very very fundamentalist religions have a dang thing negative to say about that.

Right,
To say nothing of animal cruelty. If simple biological life were all pro-lifers cared about, every single one of them would have to also advocate animal rights. Clearly, they this isn't the case because there's more to the issue than biological life.

[Gods_Mercenary]

But that's an utterly arbitrary and meaningless distinction to make. So why make the distinction between human and non-human a matter of genetics and why not make it one of self-sufficiency, or brain waves, or the ability to feel pain? What makes genetics any more of a deciding factor?

Because plenty of animals are self sufficient, have brain waves, and feel pain, only we have our genetic makeup.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: JaneDoe321 "life" is not inherently worth saving. Tumors are "alive" and we kill them allllllll the time and hardly anybody aside from some very very fundamentalist religions have a dang thing negative to say about that.

Tumors don't develop into people.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Jinei Right, To say nothing of animal cruelty. If simple biological life were all pro-lifers cared about, every single one of them would have to also advocate animal rights. Clearly, they this isn't the case because there's more to the issue than biological life.

Because that biologic life is not human, nor does it have the potential to become as human as you or I.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: Merc Because plenty of animals are self sufficient, have brain waves, and feel pain, only we have our genetic makeup.

But we can also link every post-birth human up by the presence of a human brain, the presence of a human heart, a human liver, a human skeleton. Why make the distinction a genetic one and not one of anatomy or abilities? Where's the objective worth in having 46 chromosomes?

Besides that, not everyone we consider human has a human chromosomal makeup. Should people with Down's syndrome or Turner's syndrom not be considered human?

[Jinei]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Because plenty of animals are self sufficient, have brain waves, and feel pain, only we have our genetic makeup.

The thing that makes us human, the thing that humans value most, is not a combination of nucleic acids or even the potential to become human, but the human brain itself.

[Gods_Mercenary]

If you value the human mind, why not give that cell a chance to develop into a person with one?

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary If you value the human mind, why not give that cell a chance to develop into a person with one?

We give plenty of mind's a chance, but not all. This is how it has always been. I don't see a big reason to over-populate the earth any further. To me it's a common sense issue. Mother doesn't want fetus, she doesn't have to keep. Quite simple. To me it's not all that morally wrong. A fetus is a growing, live human in the early stages that really doesn't have a value unless the mother says so. The mother is the determinator. She has this right because it's her body. The baby can be an intruder, or welcome. One or the other. The earth has not crumbled into the sea because women have abortions. It's a necessary part of life.

[Gods_Mercenary]

The earth doesn't crumble into the sea if I commit murder, either. If you want to control population, how about birth control and education?

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary The earth doesn't crumble into the sea if I commit murder, either. If you want to control population, how about birth control and education?

Been done. Still need better BC. No woman should have to get pregnant if she doesn't want a kid. Science has been coming up with more and more stuff, but they all mimick abortion to some degree. After conception has started you've got to end a life.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Since when does the pill or a condom end a zygote's life?

[inri]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary If you value the human mind, why not give that cell a chance to develop into a person with one?

Because it happens to be growing in and off of my body, and I'm not particularly interested in having nausea for months straight, stretched skin, sore breasts, aching back, fatigue, dimished physical movement - then.... excruciating labor pains, torn/cut parts of my nether regions, lifelong stretchmarks, urinary complications, sagging stomach, increased weight,...and a child to care for the next 18 years.
Oh, and did I mention that 'I' as the 'host' of this clump of cells, do not personally believe it is anything more than that at this point - I personally, do not believe there is 'murder' of any sort going on, i am merely excercising my right to do as I please with my body.

[Gods_Mercenary]

And that right denies life to a future human being because of your discomfort. I see this as immoral.

[inri]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary And that right denies life to a future human being because of your discomfort. I see this as immoral.

this is a very individualized moral issue. Obviously not all believe the same thing regarding the life of a fetus. As I don't personally see it as immoral, and it happens to be growing inside and off of my body, (which last time i checked, I'm in ownership of) requiring my cooperation...I GET TO MAKE THE DECISION!

[Jinei]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary If you value the human mind, why not give that cell a chance to develop into a person with one?

Give it a chance??? If the human mind draws the line between sentience and mindless drone, querreling over potential still doesn't change the fact that the developed fetus has something the undeveloped has not. In one case we have murder, in the other we don't. That's the grand distinction -- the only one that really matters.

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe We give plenty of mind's a chance, but not all. This is how it has always been. I don't see a big reason to over-populate the earth any further. To me it's a common sense issue. Mother doesn't want fetus, she doesn't have to keep. Quite simple. To me it's not all that morally wrong. A fetus is a growing, live human in the early stages that really doesn't have a value unless the mother says so. The mother is the determinator. She has this right because it's her body. The baby can be an intruder, or welcome. One or the other. The earth has not crumbled into the sea because women have abortions. It's a necessary part of life.

Quote by: inri Because it happens to be growing in and off of my body, and I'm not particularly interested in having nausea for months straight, stretched skin, sore breasts, aching back, fatigue, dimished physical movement - then.... excruciating labor pains, torn/cut parts of my nether regions, lifelong stretchmarks, urinary complications, sagging stomach, increased weight,...and a child to care for the next 18 years. Oh, and did I mention that 'I' as the 'host' of this clump of cells, do not personally believe it is anything more than that at this point - I personally, do not believe there is 'murder' of any sort going on, i am merely excercising my right to do as I please with my body.

Quote by: inri this is a very individualized moral issue. Obviously not all believe the same thing regarding the life of a fetus. As I don't personally see it as immoral, and it happens to be growing inside and off of my body, (which last time i checked, I'm in ownership of) requiring my cooperation...I GET TO MAKE THE DECISION!

I could understand if you want an abortion within the first or second trimester. But I consider third trimester abortions to be murder, given the developmental status of the fetus.

[inri]

Quote by: Jinei Give it a chance??? If the human mind draws the line between sentience and mindless drone, querreling over potential still doesn't change the fact that the developed fetus has something the undeveloped has not. In one case we have murder, in the other we don't. That's the grand distinction -- the only one that really matters. I could understand if you want an abortion within the first or second trimester. But I consider third trimester abortions to be murder, given the developmental status of the fetus.

...personally, I cannot imagine anyone electing to abort in the 3rd trimester...i'm sure it does happen possibly for specialized reasons concerning health of mother perhaps..however, considering that even in the second trimester, a woman would have to go through an actual 'labor' and deliver the fetus, It just seems that anyone wanting to terminate a pregancy would opt for earlier rather than later (if possible).
There was a point here in Canada in the '80's where if a woman wanted an abortion she had to have it 'approved' by a 'board'...this took up to 6 weeks to transpire, allowing the pregnancy to develop that much longer, which was arguably far more difficult for the mother emotionally and physically...absolutely ludicrous when you think about it!...the girl I knew at the time who was faced with this unwanted pregnancy was researching methods of doing the abortion herself, had the board turned her request down....pretty sad situation and an indicator of just how far we've come.