When is an embryo/fetus a human life?

[OKTexas]

A pile of computer parts which are being "developed into a computer" aren't a automatically "a computer" at the moment development starts.

If it lacks a functioning CPU, I would argue that it isn't a "computer".

Damn, you still don't get it, a developing baby already has all the parts it needs.

.

 

[Midnight FM]

Damn, you still don't get it, a developing baby already has all the parts it needs.

I'm saying that it may be a developing "human organism", but it isn't a "baby" or a "person". Being a baby or a person requires having consciousness.

A pile of computer parts on an assembly line may "develop into a computer" if left to their own devices, but that doesn't mean that it is a "computer" at the exact moment that the assembly line becomes active.

To me, common sense alone dictates that this isn't the equivalent of a baby:

 

[OKTexas]

I'm saying that it may be a developing "human organism", but it isn't a "baby" or a "person". Being a baby or a person requires having consciousness.

A pile of computer parts on an assembly line may "develop into a computer" if left to their own devices, but that doesn't mean that it is a "computer" at the exact moment that the assembly line becomes active.

To me, common sense alone dictates that this isn't the equivalent of a baby:

Once again you're arguing semantics, not science.

.

 

[Midnight FM]

Once again you're arguing semantics, not science.

.

The idea of the "self" isn't an issue of science, it's an issue of philosophy.

So simply because a zygote is a "human organism" or "has human DNA" doesn't mean that "you" are the organism or the DNA from the moment of conception.

I would argue that "you" are a consciousness which inhabits a human organism, and that when you die, your consciousness ceases to exist, even though your human body and your DNA remain. So prior to the organism having a human brain or consciousness, you do not exist.

 

[Chuz Life]

Damn, you still don't get it, a developing baby already has all the parts it needs.

To them, "personhood" is a gift or privilege that is granted to us by the government, rather than an intrinsic aspect of being a human being.

To Them, "Personhood" is only an arbitrarily decided "legal construct" that is set to where a human being / child is not a human being or "natural person" unless and until they survive and live long enough to have developed past their arbitrarily decided point, where they (the left) can't stomach or justify the denial of personhood anymore.

They place an onus on the child - The child must be able to breach their denials, before they will even consider it to be a human being, child or person.

Rather than to look at the attributes the child already has and then recognize them as children by THOSE aspects and attributes.

And these are the ******* tardz that call OTHER people "fascists."

**** them all!

 

[OKTexas]

The idea of the "self" isn't an issue of science, it's an issue of philosophy.

So simply because a zygote is a "human organism" or "has human DNA" doesn't mean that "you" are the organism or the DNA from the moment of conception.

I would argue that "you" are a consciousness which inhabits a human organism, and that when you die, your consciousness ceases to exist, even though your human body and your DNA remain. So prior to the organism having a human brain or consciousness, you do not exist.

Of course every human was the organism that has consciousness in the ultras. A heartbeat can be detected as early as 4 weeks, guess what controls the involuntary heartbeat, that would be the brain.

.

 

[Midnight FM]

Of course every human was the organism that has consciousness in the ultras. A heartbeat can be detected as early as 4 weeks, guess what controls the involuntary heartbeat, that would be the brain.

.

Right, but a zygote does not have a brain. I would be fine with limiting abortion up until the point a heartbeat is detected. However, many are claiming that, even prior to the development of a brain, a zygote is the equivalent of a baby, and I digress.

 

[schmidlap]

View attachment 1141820

Ypi ei;; [r

View attachment 1141820

If you like to pretend that an acorn is an oak tree, and that a pile of acorns is a forest, you can, of course.

If someone removes your pile of acorns, don't scream deforestation. They're acorns.

If you can't convince reasonable people of your notions, don't try to intimidate them with your politicians and bureaucrats.

 

[initforme]

If the fertility rate decreases another full point, wont that help solve this issue?

 

[schmidlap]

Are you seriously trying to compare an ungerminated seed to a human embryo? Talk about irrelevant. LMAO

.

Germinated or otherwise, you are not going to use your politicians and bureaucrats to intimidate the majority of Americans who disagree with you. Most recognize that a microscopic mindless mass of cells is not a person.

 

[Grumblenuts]

That's comparable to you?

Words like "conception" have multiple meanings. I try not to obsess over any of them. Acorns, yes. Being a squirrel and all. That's just me. Unlike money, acorns do grow on trees which vastly come from thin air. An acorn drops from an oak tree and I'm all over it.

Acorns face many challenges once they’ve dropped and most do not go on to produce huge oak trees. When an oak tree drops its acorns, they usually don’t travel very far. Even small acorns are heavy and normally end up lying in piles around the base of the oak tree. This is a problem for acorns for a couple of reasons. First, acorns need sunshine to start growing and they can’t get much under the shady canopy of a large oak. Second, there may be a high concentration of acorns in a small area. These acorns need more space to start growing first into seedlings, and if lucky, into a large tree. So, who comes to the rescue?

 

[schmidlap]

No, they are charged with stealing Quercus and prosecuted. The sentence is the same as stealing an oak tree.

You do understand that kittens and cats are both felines? Puppies and dogs are still canines. Yet it's important to strip humanity from early stage development humans.

Laughably, the half wits say follow the science.

A microscopic, mindless mass of cells is not a person, and your politicians and bureaucrats are not about to force everyone to fantasize otherwise via state coercion.

 

[pknopp]

I'm saying that it may be a developing "human organism", but it isn't a "baby" or a "person". Being a baby or a person requires having consciousness.

A pile of computer parts on an assembly line may "develop into a computer" if left to their own devices, but that doesn't mean that it is a "computer" at the exact moment that the assembly line becomes active.

To me, common sense alone dictates that this isn't the equivalent of a baby:

Abortions aren't happening at that point.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Another Thread Pandering To Anthropocentric Psychotics With Shit For Brains "

* Buffoons Running The Show *

I'm not convinced that it is a human life from the moment of conception (given that it doesn't have a brain, for example), but at some point during pregnancy, I believe it qualifies as a human life.

If people are merely arguing that it is a "potential life" from the moment of conception, then preventing a potential life from coming into existence obviously isn't the same as taking a life from existence. (If that was true, then if a person only has 2 children when they have the ability to have 5 means they should be charged with 3 counts of murder, and we know that is absurd).

In roe v wade the term " potential life " refers to an ability for a fetus to survive an imminent live birth , at natural viability , as a live birth is required for equal protection with a us citizen as enumerated in us 14th amendment .

It is so overtly pathetic and clear that the fee press , jurisprudence and political leaders are negligent , incompetent and possibly intentional cowards on this issue .

 

[Monk-Eye]

" How Chickens Crossed The Road Without Heads "

* Anthropocentric Psychopaths Remain Uneducated And Mentally Retarded *

Of course every human was the organism that has consciousness in the ultras. A heartbeat can be detected as early as 4 weeks, guess what controls the involuntary heartbeat, that would be the brain.
.

There is a difference between an autonomic nervous system and a cerebral cortex , while sentience - a cognizant awareness of physical stimulus requires thalamocortial spindles to bridge the thalamus ( autonomic nervous systems ) and cortex ( higher order thinking ) , which do not begin to develop any earlier than 23 weeks and onset of sentience is estimated between 36 to 39 weeks based on electroencephalogram .

The natural viability and sentience arguments are rhetorical because women do not seek without cause abortions at those stages of development , while the sanctimonious , sacrosanct , psychopathic , freak farmer fanatics demand that others deliver freaks or risk their fertility and health for the repugnant arrogance of uninvolved apex predators damned dirty apes .

Thalamocortical radiations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[schmidlap]

If you can't convince reasonable people of your notions, don't try to intimidate them with your politicians and bureaucrats.

Most Americans still support legal abortion​

Sixty-four percent of Americans support legal abortion in most cases. ​

Zealots attempting to force everyone to follow their unpopular dogma via state intimidation will not work.

The United States is not about to become Nicaragua to make them happy.

Women die after Nicaragua's ban on abortions​

 

[whutTHEYsay]

At conception

Why exactly? Conception is not a public phenomenon. It takes place inside a developed human being‘s body. That human being has a right to privacy. Does she not? If a woman finds out, she has conceived and decides she does not want to give birth, what effect does that have on the public or specifically, your rights and your life and your well-being and pursuit of happiness?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

A microscopic, mindless mass of cells is not a person, and your politicians and bureaucrats are not about to force everyone to fantasize otherwise via state coercion.

Where do you learn this nonsense? Is this ignorance what schools are churning out? I am appalled at the level of scientific ignorance.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Why exactly? Conception is not a public phenomenon. It takes place inside a developed human being‘s body. That human being has a right to privacy. Does she not? If a woman finds out, she has conceived and decides she does not want to give birth, what effect does that have on the public or specifically, your rights and your life and your well-being and pursuit of happiness?

Nothing. A woman has the absolute right to end the life of this immature human. What she doesn't have the right to do is demand that everyone reject the foundations of biology.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Where do you learn this nonsense? Is this ignorance what schools are churning out? I am appalled at the level of scientific ignorance.

What mindless mass of cells is a person according to science.. Please respond with citations.

Nothing. A woman has the absolute right to end the life of this immature human. What she doesn't have the right to do is demand that everyone reject the foundations of biology.

I don’t demand that everyone reject the foundations of biology basically because I don’t know what the hell you are talking about. Sounds like some kind of white Christian grievance thing that Republicans do.