CDZ When does human life begin?

[miketx]

For me, it was about 45.

 

[ding]

This question is really controversial.
In my opinion human life begins in the moment a woman gives birth to her child!
As I said before it's a controversial matter so my opinion doesn't mean anything for the others

So what do you call it before that point?

 

[anotherlife]

Science does not say that human life begins at conception. But there was a thread here that described a scientific theory that the entire universe is fit for a bio centric model.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner, Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 198

This is not true, because DNA alone is not life. In fact, viruses also have DNA, but they are only live within their hosts. If extracted, they are simply crystals.

A virus is an infective agent that typically consists of a nucleic acid molecule in a protein coat, is too small to be seen by light microscopy, and is able to multiply only within the living cells of a host. It has DNA as its genetic material and replicates using a DNA-dependent DNA polymerase. The nucleic acid is usually double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) but may also be single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). DNA viruses belong to either Group I or Group II of the Baltimore classification system for viruses.

A zygote is a genetically distinct new human being which has never existed before. All human beings began life this way. No human being has ever begun life as a virus.

Genetically distinct, but not yet live. The definition of life is that the system can keep itself within its own specifications by its own effort. You can write software that can do that, but a zygote can't so it is not live.

This question is really controversial.
In my opinion human life begins in the moment a woman gives birth to her child!
As I said before it's a controversial matter so my opinion doesn't mean anything for the others

Yes, your opinion matters. Even in science, opinion makes up half the cases, which is why every science develops in trends, not in random. Even natural sciences.

Thanks anotherlife! I appreciate the fact you think my opinion matters!

Actually, I heard a theory, that human life begins after you learn to speak, and what happens before it is just bio function. They explain the lack of memories before speech with this theory. I think this is very controversial.

Where did you hear this exactly?

Sometime in school, but I forgot now how. I can imagine though that this is the most correct way of looking at it. Without a sole / spirit in the body, it is only a bio program, not life. And without mental functions that result in speech or other social interactions, the entire thing is just a temporary inout, i guess.

 

[ding]

Sometime in school, but I forgot now how. I can imagine though that this is the most correct way of looking at it. Without a sole / spirit in the body, it is only a bio program, not life. And without mental functions that result in speech or other social interactions, the entire think is just a temporary inout, i guess.

Sorry... this isn't a religious discussion. Science tells us that it is living and that it is human being in its earliest stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death.

 

[ding]

Genetically distinct, but not yet live. The definition of life is that the system can keep itself within its own specifications by its own effort. You can write software that can do that, but a zygote can't so it is not live.

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

 

[anotherlife]

Sometime in school, but I forgot now how. I can imagine though that this is the most correct way of looking at it. Without a sole / spirit in the body, it is only a bio program, not life. And without mental functions that result in speech or other social interactions, the entire think is just a temporary inout, i guess.

Sorry... this isn't a religious discussion. Science tells us that it is living and that it is human being n its earliest stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death.

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

Genetically distinct, but not yet live. The definition of life is that the system can keep itself within its own specifications by its own effort. You can write software that can do that, but a zygote can't so it is not live.

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

 

[ding]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

Do you have any scientific evidence to do so? You do realize that science considers both sperm and eggs alive, right?

 

[ding]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

 

[anotherlife]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

No it is not an experimental evidence. It may be unique, it may be human, but is it live? I think not.

 

[ding]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

No it is not an experimental evidence. It may be unique, it may be human, but is it live? I think not.

Yes, it is experimental evidence. Both sperm and eggs are alive. Science has determined this. The difference is that sperm and eggs are not a new genetically distinct human being. A zygote is a new genetically distinct LIVING human being. Life is always continuous. Life has never not been continuous since the first human being.

 

[ding]

No it is not an experimental evidence. It may be unique, it may be human, but is it live? I think not.

Do you have any scientific evidence to believe that a zygote is not alive?

 

[anotherlife]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

No it is not an experimental evidence. It may be unique, it may be human, but is it live? I think not.

Yes, it is experimental evidence. Both sperm and eggs are alive. Science has determined this. The difference is that sperm and eggs are not a new genetically distinct human being. A zygote is a new genetically distinct LIVING human being. Life is always continuous. Life has never not been continuous since the first human being.

It's just part of the mother's body. Like her teeth are a part of her body too, her teeth are also alive. How does it make any difference whether it is genetically identical to her or not? If she had had a heart transplant, would you call it a new being or just a part of her body?

 

[WillowTree]

You know, considering that Adam wasn't considered "alive" until God blew the Breath of Life into him, I think that when you draw your first breath, that is when you are "alive".

Would there be a breath without conception?

 

[ding]

Science can be questioned and rejected when it is purely interpretative and not empirical, such as in this case. I disagree with this interpretation because nothing proves it.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

No it is not an experimental evidence. It may be unique, it may be human, but is it live? I think not.

Yes, it is experimental evidence. Both sperm and eggs are alive. Science has determined this. The difference is that sperm and eggs are not a new genetically distinct human being. A zygote is a new genetically distinct LIVING human being. Life is always continuous. Life has never not been continuous since the first human being.

It's just part of the mother's body. Like her teeth are a part of her body too, her teeth are also alive. How does it make any difference whether it is genetically identical to her or not? If she had had a heart transplant, would you call it a new being or just a part of her body?

No. A zygote is not a body part. A zygote is a genetically distinct new human being that has never existed before and will never exist again. It is a one of a kind LIVING new human being.

How does it make any difference whether it is genetically identical to her or not? If it were genetically identical to her it would be one of her NATURAL body parts. But since it is a new human being it is genetically distinct.

If she had a heart transplant, it would be body part that came from someone else that was now a part of her body. But under no circumstance would that heart be a new human being.

Do you have any scientific evidence to believe that a zygote is not alive?

 

[andy753]

Science tells us that a human life begins at conception when a new human being - who has never existed before and will never exist again - comes into existence. How do we know? DNA

That's a tough question, I usually lean towards science on some debates, but science IS wrong sometimes. Being serious here, if you could break it down to play by play action, if you considered a zygote "alive", then when did it become "alive"? If you say when the sperm breached the egg wall, that could be true. But....what about the instant before the sperm got inside the egg, is the sperm and egg both not alive? Is it alive when the head is in the egg, or does the head AND tail have to be inside? Does it have to enter the egg and be inside for 1 second, 10 minutes, 1 day?

Myself I almost consider my sperm alive, I've been told this is why some religions don't want you jerking off in the shower and killing millions of babies. At least that's what a weirdo co worker told me once. I know personally my views on conception changed a little after I had my 2 girls. When you see them on the ultra sound it makes it pretty damn ridiculous to think that people are OK with aborting a fetus. And I'm for abortion!! Damn, I'm confused now.....

And I didn't mean to hijack the thread and talk about abortion. And to answer your question, I'd say your alive after about 1 month. Did I win?

 

[JoeMoma]

If life ends when your heart stops beating, perhaps life starts when it first begins beating.

That's the thing, science does not define life by a beating heart. Science defines life as anything which has certain characteristics that all living things have.

The 7 Characteristics of Life

Characteristics of living things

If we are talking only animal life and not plant life I still contend that the life of that animal "begins" at the start of a heart beat and ends with the stopping of the heart beat. In the 7 characteristics of life listed, the first two characteristics describe composition but not animation. IMO a clump of cells or a more highly organized system with cells and organs is not "alive" until the "engine" starts.

Looked at another way, the last 5 characteristics of life cease immediately with the stoppage of the heart. And through decomposition, the first 2 describing cellular composition are eventually gone as well.

I am in NO WAY making a statement on if or when it's ok to abort a fetus. That is a different discussion altogether.

So is a person with an artificial heart that appears to be alive actually dead?

 

[Care4all]

Science tells us that a human life begins at conception when a new human being - who has never existed before and will never exist again - comes into existence. How do we know? DNA

God said, he formed Adam(humans), and once formed He breathed life in to him....So life begins when their first BREATH is taken.... the breath of life.

Scientifically, a new creation happens after conception or maybe a little later.....when a woman becomes pregnant, when the fertilized egg attaches itself to the uterus and begins forming..

 

[JoeMoma]

The OP correctly answers his own question that in that a new human life begins at conception. People that understand the biology involved in sexual reproduction and the cycle of life know this to be scientifically true. That being said, many people use a philosophical definition of the beginning of life to rationalize their beliefs, science be damned.

 

[ding]

Science tells us that a human life begins at conception when a new human being - who has never existed before and will never exist again - comes into existence. How do we know? DNA

God said, he formed Adam(humans), and once formed He breathed life in to him....So life begins when their first BREATH is taken.... the breath of life.

Scientifically, a new creation happens after conception or maybe a little later.....when a woman becomes pregnant, when the fertilized egg attaches itself to the uterus and begins forming..

Wow... I was not expecting that from you at all. Color me surprised. Bravo. This is me doing the Wayne and Garth, I am not worthy bow to you.

 

[Care4all]

If your baby after delivery, never takes their first breath, it is considered a still born, born dead....they do not have the breath of life....