EdwinWillers
Well-Known Member
- Jan 13, 2010
- 19,443
- 5,258
- Country
- Niue
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
"biological?"I"m using the biological definition.
"Biological??"
... just.... wow.
Upvote
0
"biological?"I"m using the biological definition.
Well you're mixing tenses now.Yes I know that, because the ruling was 7 - 2!
"biological?"
"Biological??"
... just.... wow.
I suppose "baby" qualifies as a "hysteric, emotional" definition to those who favor aborting them?Yes. The biological definition. I know some folks like to use hysteric, emotional definitions. I prefer scientific ones.
The biological definition, as opposed to... what? The non-biological definition?
If we want to discuss biological terms, perhaps we should start with the words human and life. That would probably be over quicker than a word game.
I suppose "baby" qualifies as a "hysteric, emotional" definition to those who favor aborting them?
"Fetus" is no more scientifically accurate than "baby." Appealing to "science" in an attempt to come up with some sort of sterile distinction is at best, disingenuous.Yes. "Murdering your baby" is much more hysteric and emotional (no need for the scare quotes) than "aborting a fetus".
The goalposts were moved when justification was needed for arguments in favor of abortion.The biological definition as in the biological definition. We could also use the developmental definition if that verbiage is more to your liking.
Why move the goalposts? We're discussing the biological definition of infant and that definition is 1 month to 1 year after birth.
Human development (biology) - Wikipedia
I like to use settled science too.Yes. The biological definition. I know some folks like to use hysteric, emotional definitions. I prefer scientific ones.
I think it's a bit sad that you view anything not charged with emotion as somehow being beneath you.The goalposts were moved when justification was needed for arguments in favor of abortion.
Your wikipedia link is utterly irrelevant - and just as disingenuous since any appeal to "science" in this manner is tantamount to seeking appeal to something supposedly authoritative so as to avoid dealing with the truth.
In other words, it's nothing more than one of the many misguided attempts to rationalize abortion.
Not really a meaningfull contribution to the discussion. Of course fertilised egg cell is alive. So is a random blood cell in your left pinky finger.I like to use settled science too.
Science shows that life begins at conception
Contrary to Carmon’s allegation that “conception” and “life” are not scientific terms, both of these words are clearly defined in science dictionaries and widely used in scientific literature.
To cite just a few examples, the American Heritage Science Dictionary defines “conception” as “the formation of a zygote resulting from the union of a sperm and egg cell; fertilization.” (For reference, a zygote is the first stage of a human embryo.)
Likewise, the entry for “life” in the American Heritage Dictionary of Science states that life is “the form of existence that organisms like animals and plants have and that inorganic objects or organic dead bodies lack; animate existence, characterized by growth, reproduction, metabolism, and response to stimuli.”
Rubio’s statement that “human life begins at conception” is consistent with both of these definitions, because human zygotes display all four empirical attributes of life:
- Growth – As explained in the textbook Essentials of Human Development: A Life-Span View, “the zygote grows rapidly through cell division.”
- Reproduction – Per Human Sexuality: An Encyclopedia, zygotes sometimes form identical twins, which is an act of “asexual reproduction.” (Also, in this context, the word “reproduction” is more accurately understood as “reproductive potential” instead of “active reproduction.” For example, three-year-old humans are manifestly alive, but they can’t actively reproduce.)
- Metabolism – As detailed in the medical text Human Gametes and Preimplantation Embryos: Assessment and Diagnosis, “At the zygote stage,” the human embryo metabolizes “carboxylic acids pyruvate and lactate as its preferred energy substrates.”
Furthermore, the science of embryology has proven that the genetic composition of humans is formed during fertilization, and as the textbook Molecular Biology explains, this genetic material is “the very basis of life itself.”
- Response to stimuli – Collins English Dictionarydefines a “stimulus” as “any drug, agent, electrical impulse, or other factor able to cause a response in an organism.” Experiments have shown that zygotes are responsive to such factors. For example, a 2005 paper in the journal Human Reproduction Updatenotes that a compound called platelet-activating factor “acts upon the zygote” by stimulating “metabolism,” “cell-cycle progression,” and “viability.”
In accord with the facts above, the textbook Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects directly states: “The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” This may be controversial from a political perspective, but the sciences of embryology and genetics leave no doubt as to when human life begins.
The science of abortion: When does life begin? - Just Facts
WHEN DO HUMAN BEINGS BEGIN?
"SCIENTIFIC" MYTHS AND SCIENTIFIC FACTS
Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.
The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists�not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question. Current discussions on abortion, human embryo research (including cloning, stem cell research, and the formation of mixed-species chimeras), and the use of abortifacients involve specific claims as to when the life of every human being begins. If the "science" used to ground these various discussions is incorrect, then any conclusions will be rendered groundless and invalid. The purpose of this article is to focus primarily on a sampling of the "scientific" myths, and on the objective scientific facts that ought to ground these discussions. At least it will clarify what the actual international consensus of human embryologists is with regard to this relatively simple scientific question. In the final section, I will also address some "scientific" myths that have caused much confusion within the philosophical discussions on "personhood."
II. When does a human being begin?
Getting a handle on just a few basic human embryological terms accurately can considerably clarify the drastic difference between the "scientific" myths that are currently circulating, and the actual objective scientific facts. This would include such basic terms as: "gametogenesis," "oogenesis," "spermatogenesis," "fertilization," "zygote," "embryo," and "blastocyst." Only brief scientific descriptions will be given here for these terms. Further, more complicated, details can be obtained by investigating any well-established human embryology textbook in the library, such as some of those referenced below. Please note that the scientific facts presented here are not simply a matter of my own opinion. They are direct quotes and references from some of the most highly respected human embryology textbooks, and represent a consensus of human embryologists internationally.
A. Basic human embryological facts
To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization�the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte�usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.
When Do Human Beings Begin?
The Developing Human Being
By Keith Moore, and T.V.N. Persaud
7th edition, 2003
From an introductory definition section:
“Human development is a continuous process that begins when an oocyte(ovum) from a female is fertilized by a sperm(spermatozoon) from a male. Cell division, cell migration, programmed cell death, differentiation, growth, and cell rearrangement transform the fertilized oocyte, a highly specialized, totipotent cell – a zygote – into a multicellular human being. Although most developmental changes occur during the embryonic and fetal periods, important changes occur during later periods of development: infancy, childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood. Development does not stop at birth. Important changes, in addition to growth, occur after birth (e.g., development of teeth and female breasts). The brain triples in weight between birth and 16 years; most developmental changes are completed by the age of 25. Although it is customary to divide human development into prenatal (before birth) and postnatal (after birth) periods, birth is merely a dramatic event during development resulting in a change in environment.” (p. 2)
“Zygote. This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm during fertilization. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” (p. 2)
“Embryo. The developing human during its early stages of development. Theembryonic period extends to the end of the eighth week (56 days), by which time the beginnings of all major structures are present.” (p. 3)
From chapter 2: “The Beginning of Human Development: First Week”
First sentence of the Chapter: “Human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell – a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” (p. 16)
“Studies on early stages of development indicate that human oocytes are usually fertilized with 12 hours after ovulation. In vitro observations have shown that the oocyte cannot be fertilized after 24 hours and this it degenerates shortly thereafter.” [This would buttress our argument that sperm and ovum by themselves are parts of the parents and not entire beings. That there is a substantial change between gametes and zygotes.] (p. 31)
“The zygote is genetically unique because half of its chromosomes come from the mother and half from the father. The zygote contains a new combination of chromosomes that is different from that in the cells of either of the parents.” (p. 33)
“Cleavage consists of repeated mitotic divisions of the zygote, resulting in a rapid increase in the number of cells. The embryonic cells – blastomeres – become smaller with each cleavage division. First the zygote divides into two blastomores, which then divide into four blastomores, either blastomeres, and so on.” (p. 36-37) [We can use the cleavage discussion to show that now the embryo is operating on its own and developing.]
And more:
Quotes from Textbooks on Human Development
A zygote [fertilized egg] is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.
Keith L. Moore’s The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (7th edition, Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003)
http://www.textbookrush.com/browse/...calinventory&gclid=CJGkm7nNncoCFQqpaQodVZINSA
The French geneticist Jerome L. LeJeune has stated:
“To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. The human nature of the human being from conception to old age is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” [The Human Life Bill: Hearings on S. 158 Before the Subcommittee on Separation of Powers of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 97th Congress, 1st Session (1981). See Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Options and Issues (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1989), p. 149 also Francis J. Beckwith,Politically Correct Death: Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993), p. 42.] (Emphases mine – VJT.)
Dr. Hymie Gordon, professor of medical genetics and Mayo Clinic physician stated:
“I think we can now also say that the question of the beginning of life – when life begins – is no longer a question for theological or philosophical dispute. It is an established scientific fact. Theologians and philosophers may go on to debate the meaning of life or purpose of life, but it is an established fact that all life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception.” [The Human Life Bill – S. 158, Report 9, see Francis J. Beckwith, Politically Correct Death: Answering the Arguments for Abortion Rights(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993), p. 42.] (Emphases mine – VJT.)
I believe it was as the question was one of science. Science provided.Not really a meaningfull contribution to the discussion
A random blood cell from your pinky will have 100% of your DNA. A human being in the womb from conception has its own DNA distinct from both parents. Therefore your point is irrelevant.Of course fertilised egg cell is alive. So is a random blood cell in your left pinky finger.
Please state the scientific definition of "personhood."The question is not one of life, but one of personhood.
I'm sorry for your sadness.I think it's a bit sad that you view anything not charged with emotion as somehow being beneath you.
You see abortion as an effective means of poverty prevention?If the governor doesn't want to be a complete hypocrite, he should make allowances for the future needs of these babies born to mothers in difficult circumstances.
Mississippi ranks 50th in almost every category--median incomes, poverty rate, educational quality, etc., etc.
He has his work cut out for him, doesn't he?
Is Plessy vs Ferguson still in effect?They are not going to reverse the Roe vs wade ruling even though you have a majority of conservative judges.
As a Catholic do you see the developing human being in the womb from conception as morally equal to humans born outside the womb? If not why not?I am certain that Planned Parenthood's providing low or no-cost contraception prevents many abortions.
I am also certain that private charities are NOT more effectve in helping poor infants and children. Private charities are funded by voluntary contributions, which are far less reliable than government-supported assistance. As a matter of fact, the misguided Republican tax legislation, which will cause fewer people to itemize, may reduce charitable contributions by even more.
Private charities are good but often the areas in greatest need have the fewest local "givers" who can support them.
All very concerning and are facts bearing on a larger problem. None are justifications to kill developing human beings in the womb.Mississippi has one of the lowest qualities of life of any state in the country. It's ranked 48th in high school graduates, and 49th in residents with college degrees. (Link.) It's dead last of all the states in per-capita income, median family income, and median household income. (Link.) It also has one of the highest homicide rates in the country. (Link.) I think the MS legislature should find better ways to spend the taxpayer's money than a quixotic legal battle that will take years, and IMO, has little chance of success.