When does human life begin?

Sperm and egg are alive too, do you think they require legal rights?
1. Sperm and egg separately have not combined their 23 chromosome each to form a new individual with his/her unique 46 chromosomes. So no!
2. You didn't want to answer my question, so you are moving the goal posts by answering the question with a different question.
3. The title of this thread is when does human life begin?
 
Fine but the real question is what legal rights should it have at that stage of development?
Yes, that is the question. 100%.

But before that determination can be made the following questions must be answered:

1. Is he or she alive?
2. Is he or she human?
3. Is he or she a specific person?

The answer to all three questions is yes. Correct?
 
If we don't know for sure, that leaves us with only two choices: err on the side of allowing life to develop or err on the side of snuffing out an innocent life that has already begun the process of development that defines all life. If you don't know, then you are killing a human being as far as you know. That is the "choice" you are making. What stage of development a person is at is no justification for killing unless you accept the notion that it's 'ok' to kill a 20 year old, but not a 40 year old.
 
1. Sperm and egg separately have not combined their 23 chromosome each to form a new individual with his/her unique 46 chromosomes. So no!
2. You didn't want to answer my question, so you are moving the goal posts by answering the question with a different question.
3. The title of this thread is when does human life begin?
Every one of the cells in my body shares a set of chromosomes that is unique to me. I would have no issue having a tumor removed from my body so uniqueness is interesting but hardly important.

If you need to claim life begins at conception, in one sense you're right and I'd agree. If you claim a fertilized egg with a single set of chromosomes, no matter how unique, is deserving of legal recognition, I disagree.

We like to think human life is sacred but it is not. Even in the US we drop bombs on people because we determine that their lives have less value than our lives. We complain about getting vaccines or wearing masks that could save the lives of other because their lives are worth less than our freedoms.
 
Yes, that is the question. 100%.

But before that determination can be made the following questions must be answered:

1. Is he or she alive?
2. Is he or she human?
3. Is he or she a specific person?

The answer to all three questions is yes. Correct?
If we are talking about a fertilized egg the answers are:
  1. yes
  2. no
  3. no
 
Ok, but with respect to the question when does human life begin, what should science textbooks teach?
Life goes back to our common ancestor and everything in between that ancestor and us has bee alive. Science can tell us the facts but not the implecations.
 
If we don't know for sure, that leaves us with only two choices: err on the side of allowing life to develop or err on the side of snuffing out an innocent life that has already begun the process of development that defines all life
But since you don't have a uterus, you don't have to make any choice at all.
 
It is a human cell, little different from the trillions of human cells of the mother. It may become very different but that is in the future.
But it is different. It is a human organism at its first stage of the human life cycle. The trillions of cells of the mother are not trillions of individual organisms.
 
Who here has been to a funeral for a 20 week miscarriages?

Nobody.

Do we consider a brain dead human on life support to be "equal" to a functioning human? Nope.

So the fact exists that we view a fetus as different. Where is the line to be drawn? Tough to tell. But a line must be drawn.

So, ask the scientists when the fetus starts to feel pain, or have thoughts, etc. We should inform our moral decisions with science. Not religion or feelings.
 

Forum List

Back
Top