A woman and her husband's difficult decision

[Archivist]

I was speaking of newborns, and older children are not newborns. And you’re wrong.

As usual, anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Proof please.

I guess you don’t think older kids are worth much.

 

[SPF]

As usual, anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Proof please.

If this is a topic that concerns you, and you prefer to be more involved than just trolling my posts, I invite you to do some research. You can call 1-800-adoption and they can answer all your questions.

And on this topic, people that disagree me are usually the ones that are wrong. I know you’ve been on the wrong end of things a lot on the abortion topic, so I can see why it might get annoying. But facts are facts and you provide a lot of subjective opinions presented as facts when they are not.

“there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States — which means there are as many as 36 waiting families for every one child who is placed for adoption. ”

American Adoptions - How Many Couples Are Waiting to Adopt?

 

[mcarans]

I tried following the links to the sources but it didn't work for me.
"Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States"
If you click some sources it takes you to Why Do More People Choose Abortion Over Adoption?. Then looking in that article it says
"Business Library reports that “there are up to 36 couples waiting for every one baby placed for adoption.”"
Them that Business Library link comes up with nothing.

 

[Archivist]

And you're free to your own opinion, but if it's other than a new human being comes into existence at fertilization, you're wrong.

Thankfully, this is a question that has been answered objectively by science. I can quote for you all the resource material that I've done ad-naseum before, but I know you've seen it. Although since it doesn't seem to have sunk in yet, it might be helpful for you!

“The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.” Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

“Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.” Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013)

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.” Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

As I have told you many times SPF, you are entitled to your opinion. Others disagree. For example, "biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate.

The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism.

Those who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.)

Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present.

Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother’s body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry."

I know you enjoy claiming that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You are so wrong in that thought, and we can't agree on exactly when human life begins there is even less agreement as to when personhood begins.

 

[Archivist]

If this is a topic that concerns you, and you prefer to be more involved than just trolling my posts, I invite you to do some research. You can call 1-800-adoption and they can answer all your questions.

And on this topic, people that disagree me are usually the ones that are wrong. I know you’ve been on the wrong end of things a lot on the abortion topic, so I can see why it might get annoying. But facts are facts and you provide a lot of subjective opinions presented as facts when they are not.

“there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States — which means there are as many as 36 waiting families for every one child who is placed for adoption. ”

American Adoptions - How Many Couples Are Waiting to Adopt?

I have done my research. You are totally wrong. Black babies are less likely to be adopted than are white babies, as stated in this article:
Black Babies, Boys Less Likely to Be Adopted. Judge Richard Posner, previously of the 7th Circuit, once stated that there was "a glut of black babies."

Also, among black babies those with lighter skin are more likely to be adopted than those with darker skin. Very sad that this attitude exists in our culture; I understand that such discrimination does not occur in many other nations.

 

[SPF]

As I have told you many times SPF, you are entitled to your opinion. Others disagree. For example, "biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate.

The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism.

Those who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.)

Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present.

Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother’s body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry."

I know you enjoy claiming that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You are so wrong in that thought, and we can't agree on exactly when human life begins there is even less agreement as to when personhood begins.

Actually, there are dozens of subjective and arbitrary opinions about when a new human being comes into existence. Some say first trimester, some second, others third. Some say heartbeat, others say neurological activity, some say ability to feel pain, others say viability, others say birth, etc etc...

But the important thing to remember is that all those arguments are subjective and arbitrary. And you also mention personhood.

Only people who want to justify actions against humans that would otherwise be considered immoral create the made up distinction between a human being and a human person. Arguing that only human persons are morally valuable. Again, this position is subjective and made up by whoever is making the argument.

The question as to when a new human being comes into existence is not a religious or a philosophical question - its a scientific/medical question. And thanks to the advancements in science, we now know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. Again, see the cited material I provided for you.

 

[Archivist]

Actually, there are dozens of subjective and arbitrary opinions about when a new human being comes into existence. Some say first trimester, some second, others third. Some say heartbeat, others say neurological activity, some say ability to feel pain, others say viability, others say birth, etc etc...

But the important thing to remember is that all those arguments are subjective and arbitrary. And you also mention personhood.

Only people who want to justify actions against humans that would otherwise be considered immoral create the made up distinction between a human being and a human person. Arguing that only human persons are morally valuable. Again, this position is subjective and made up by whoever is making the argument.

The question as to when a new human being comes into existence is not a religious or a philosophical question - its a scientific/medical question. And thanks to the advancements in science, we now know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. Again, see the cited material I provided for you.

Except science does not agree on one defining moment as the beginning of human life. If you read my post you know that there are at least four such moments when it can be said that human life begins.

 

[SPF]

Except science does not agree on one defining moment as the beginning of human life. If you read my post you know that there are at least four such moments when it can be said that human life begins.

And if you read my response you would know that the 4 such moments you provided: "novel genome", "gastrulation" neural activity" and "viability", are just 4 of a dozen moments in a human beings development. But all of those moments of development are just that, moments in a developing human beings life.

The moment that the new human being came into existence was actually fertilization, as attested to by science.

I've only ever seen people attempt to argue for a time later than fertilization for when a new human comes into existence / the assigning of the title of person, to be for the excuse to perform an action against the non-human/person that would otherwise be considered immoral.

 

[SPF]

I. Introduction

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.

To understand this, it should be remembered that each kind of living organism has a specific number and quality of chromosomes that are characteristic for each member of a species. (The number can vary only slightly if the organism is to survive.) For example, the characteristic number of chromosomes for a member of the human species is 46 (plus or minus, e.g., in human beings with Down�s or Turner�s syndromes). Every somatic (or, body) cell in a human being has this characteristic number of chromosomes. Even the early germ cells contain 46 chromosomes; it is only their mature forms - the sex gametes, or sperms and oocytes - which will later contain only 23 chromosomes each..1 Sperms and oocytes are derived from primitive germ cells in the developing fetus by means of the process known as "gametogenesis." Because each germ cell normally has 46 chromosomes, the process of "fertilization" can not take place until the total number of chromosomes in each germ cell are cut in half. This is necessary so that after their fusion at fertilization the characteristic number of chromosomes in a single individual member of the human species (46) can be maintained�otherwise we would end up with a monster of some sort.

To accurately see why a sperm or an oocyte are considered as only possessing human life, and not as living human beings themselves, one needs to look at the basic scientific facts involved in the processes of gametogenesis and of fertilization. It may help to keep in mind that the products of gametogenesis and fertilization are very different. The products of gametogenesis are mature sex gametes with only 23 instead of 46 chromosomes. The product of fertilization is a living human being with 46 chromosomes. Gametogenesis refers to the maturation of germ cells, resulting in gametes. Fertilization refers to the initiation of a new human being.

1) Gametogenesis

As the human embryologist Larsen2 states it, gametogenesis is the process that converts primordial germ cells (primitive sex cells) into mature sex gametes�in the male (spermatozoa, or sperms), and in the female (definitive oocytes). The timing of gametogenesis is different in males and in females. The later stages of spermatogenesis in males occur at puberty, and continue throughout adult life. The process involves the production of spermatogonia from the primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary spermatocytes, and finally spermatids�or mature spermatozoa (sperms). These mature sperms will have only half of the number of their original chromosomes�i.e., the number of chromosomes has been cut from 46 to 23, and therefore they are ready to take part in fertilization.3

Oogenesis begins in the female during fetal life. The total number of primary oocytes�about 7 million�is produced in the female fetus� ovaries by 5 months of gestation in the mother�s uterus. By birth, only about 700,000 - 2 million remain. By puberty, only about 400,000 remain. The process includes several stages of maturation�the production of oogonia from primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary oocytes, which become definitive oocytes only at puberty. This definitive oocyte is what is released each month during the female�s menstrual period, but it still has 46 chromosomes. In fact, it does not reduce its number of chromosomes until and unless it is fertilized by the sperm, during which process the definitive oocyte becomes a secondary oocyte with only 23 chromosomes.4

This halving of the number of chromosomes in the oocytes takes place by the process known as meiosis. Many people confuse meiosis with a different process known as mitosis, but there is an important difference. Mitosis refers to the normal division of a somatic or of a germ cell in order to increase the number of those cells during growth and development. The resulting cells contain the same number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 46. Meiosis refers to the halving of the number of chromosomes that are normally present in a germ cell - the precursor of a sperm or a definitive oocyte - in order for fertilization to take place. The resulting gamete cells have only half of the number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 23.

One of the best and most technically accurate explanations for this critical process of gametogenesis is by Ronan O�Rahilly,5 the human embryologist who developed the classic Carnegie stages of human embryological development. He also sits on the international board of Nomina Embryologica (which determines the correct terminology to be used in human embryology textbooks internationally):

"Gametogenesis is the production of [gametes], i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. These cells are produced in the gonads, i.e., the testes and ovaries respectively. ... During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells (those with a double set of chromosomes, as found in somatic cells [46 chromosomes]) are termed primary, and haploid cells (those with a single set of chromosomes [23 chromosomes]) are called secondary. The reduction of chromosomal number ... from 46 (the diploid number or 2n) to 23 (the haploid number or n) is accomplished by a cellular division termed meiosis. ... Spermatogenesis, the production of spermatozoa, continues from immediately after puberty until old age. It takes place in the testis, which is also an endocrine gland, the interstitial cells of which secrete testosterone. Previous to puberty, spermatogonia in the simiferous tubules of the testis remain relatively inactive. After puberty, under stimulation from the interstitial cells, spermatogonia proliferate ... and some become primary spermatocytes. When these undergo their first maturation division (meiosis 1), they become secondary spermatocytes. The second maturation division (meiosis 2) results in spermatids, which become converted into spermatozoa."6

"Oogenesis is the production and maturation of oocytes, i.e.; the female gametes derived from oogonia. Oogonia (derived from primordial germ cells) multiply by mitosis and become primary oocytes. The number of oogonia increases to nearly seven million by the middle of prenatal life, after which it diminishes to about two million at birth. From these, several thousand oocytes are derived, several hundred of which mature and are liberated (ovulated) during a reproductive period of some thirty years. Prophase of meiosis 1 begins during fetal life but ceases at the diplotene state, which persists during childhood. ... After puberty, meiosis 1 is resumed and a secondary oocyte ... is formed, together with polar body 1, which can be regarded as an oocyte having a reduced share of cytoplasm. The secondary oocyte is a female gamete in which the first meiotic division is completed and the second has begun. From oogonium to secondary oocyte takes from about 12 to 50 years to be completed. Meiosis 2 is terminated after rupture of the follicle (ovulation) but only if a spermatozoon penetrates. ... The term �ovum� implies that polar body 2 has been given off, which event is usually delayed until the oocyte has been penetrated by a spermatozoon (i.e., has been fertilized). Hence a human ovum does not [really] exist. Moreover the term has been used for such disparate structures as an oocyte and a three-week embryo, and therefore should be discarded, as a fortiori should �egg�."7 (Emphasis added.)

Thus, for fertilization to be accomplished, a mature sperm and a mature human oocyte are needed. Before fertilization,8 each has only 23 chromosomes. They each possess "human life," since they are parts of a living human being; but they are not each whole living human beings themselves. They each have only 23 chromosomes, not 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes necessary and characteristic for a single individual member of the human species. Furthermore, a sperm can produce only "sperm" proteins and enzymes; an oocyte can produce only "oocyte" proteins and enzymes; neither alone is or can produce a human being with 46 chromosomes.

Also, note O�Rahilly�s statement that the use of terms such as "ovum" and "egg"�which would include the term "fertilized egg"�is scientifically incorrect, has no objective correlate in reality, and is therefore very misleading�especially in these present discussions. Thus these terms themselves would qualify as "scientific" myths. The commonly used term, "fertilized egg," is especially very misleading, since there is really no longer an egg (or oocyte) once fertilization has begun. What is being called a "fertilized egg" is not an egg of any sort; it is a human being.

2) Fertilization

Now that we have looked at the formation of the mature haploid sex gametes, the next important process to consider is fertilization. O�Rahilly defines fertilization as:

"... the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments, and ends with the intermingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes at metaphase of the first mitotic division of the zygote. The zygote is characteristic of the last phase of fertilization and is identified by the first cleavage spindle. It is a unicellular embryo."9 (Emphasis added.)

The fusion of the sperm (with 23 chromosomes) and the oocyte (with 23 chromosomes) at fertilization results in a live human being, a single-cell human zygote, with 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes characteristic of an individual member of the human species. Quoting Moore:

"Zygote: This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo). The expression fertilized ovum refers to a secondary oocyte that is impregnated by a sperm; when fertilization is complete, the oocyte becomes a zygote."10 (Emphasis added.)

This new single-cell human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes11 (not carrot or frog enzymes and proteins), and genetically directs his/her own growth and development. (In fact, this genetic growth and development has been proven not to be directed by the mother.)12 Finally, this new human being�the single-cell human zygote�is biologically an individual, a living organism�an individual member of the human species. Quoting Larsen:

"... [W]e begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual."13 (Emphasis added.)

In sum, a mature human sperm and a mature human oocyte are products of gametogenesis�each has only 23 chromosomes. They each have only half of the required number of chromosomes for a human being. They cannot singly develop further into human beings. They produce only "gamete" proteins and enzymes. They do not direct their own growth and development. And they are not individuals, i.e., members of the human species. They are only parts�each one a part of a human being. On the other hand, a human being is the immediate product of fertilization. As such he/she is a single-cell embryonic zygote, an organism with 46 chromosomes, the number required of a member of the human species. This human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes, directs his/her own further growth and development as human, and is a new, genetically unique, newly existing, live human individual.

After fertilization the single-cell human embryo doesn�t become another kind of thing. It simply divides and grows bigger and bigger, developing through several stages as an embryo over an 8-week period. Several of these developmental stages of the growing embryo are given special names, e.g., a morula (about 4 days), a blastocyst (5-7 days), a bilaminar (two layer) embryo (during the second week), and a trilaminar (3-layer) embryo (during the third week).14

Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.

 

[Archivist]

And if you read my response you would know that the 4 such moments you provided: "novel genome", "gastrulation" neural activity" and "viability", are just 4 of a dozen moments in a human beings development. But all of those moments of development are just that, moments in a developing human beings life.

The moment that the new human being came into existence was actually fertilization, as attested to by science.

I've only ever seen people attempt to argue for a time later than fertilization for when a new human comes into existence / the assigning of the title of person, to be for the excuse to perform an action against the non-human/person that would otherwise be considered immoral.

And my earlier response says otherwise. I quoted Scott Gilbert, a noted biologist and the author of the book Developmental Biology. You stated that science had agreed that life begins at conception. Yet I have provided an eminent scientist who says otherwise, stating that it could be said to begin at four possible points. Your statement that science has agreed that life begins only at one possible point is, therefore, incorrect.

And I am still waiting for a response to my post 45 which proved that black babies are less likely to be adopted than white babies. Do you have an answer or do you just not admit when you are wrong?

 

[coffee4u]

Here's a woman talking about her and her husband's difficult decision to have an abortion:

The hardest decision of my life: to end a pregnancy because I had no paid leave
"I lived with my husband-to-be in a one room apartment in rural Vermont... At the time, my husband was earning less than a living wage at a grocery store. His job was stable, but ... he did not have paid family leave...After scrutinizing our finances, my husband and I decided that our situation did not embody the climate of confidence we agreed was necessary for us to be parents. And so we made the hardest decision of my life: to end the pregnancy...

Lawmakers in the state of Vermont, where I live, have been working to pass paid family leave legislation since a previous bill was vetoed by the Republican governor, Phil Scott, in 2018. Last week, he vetoed the bill’s latest iteration...

Our inability to afford the pregnancy was not only due to an absence of paid family leave, it also hinged on the absence of many other foundational support systems currently lacking for most Americans, including universal childcare and healthcare and a living minimum wage."

Thoughts?

The other question is, why does the US hate children?
You have terrible health care, half of the people seem to not get maternity leave and there are no parenting rooms. I recently had to explain to an American friend exactly what that was! It's a room next to the toilets that has changing counters, most time a tiny child-size toilet, perhaps some dispensers with nanpies or wipes, often a chair in a curtained off area to feed your baby and larger ones will have a playpen area with toys. There is something fundamentally disturbing about the way the US ignores and views children. The fact that the abortion rate is so high goes right along with the fact that children are not seen as valued members of the community.
Opinion | Why Does America Hate Its Children?
https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/and-all-jazz/200910/why-does-our-society-hate-children
Europe is not like this.
Why Europe is Amazing for Babies and Toddlers - Baby Can Travel

 

[lismore]

I know you enjoy claiming that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You are so wrong in that thought, and we can't agree on exactly when human life begins there is even less agreement as to when personhood begins.

Of course all believers agree when personhood begins.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)

 

[JackRT]

Of course all believers agree when personhood begins.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)

Have you noticed who the words apply to? They do not apply to humanity at large but to Jeremiah in particular. Moreover, who were the words written by? Jeremiah himself. That rings a big alarm with me. Does it for you?

 

[SPF]

Have you noticed who the words apply to? They do not apply to humanity at large but to Jeremiah in particular. Moreover, who were the words written by? Jeremiah himself. That rings a big alarm with me. Does it for you?

What kind of alarm bells does it ring for you? Do you deny the inspiration of Scripture?

 

[coffee4u]

Have you noticed who the words apply to? They do not apply to humanity at large but to Jeremiah in particular. Moreover, who were the words written by? Jeremiah himself. That rings a big alarm with me. Does it for you?

None, because it's scripture and like all scripture, it is God-breathed.
"The word of the Lord came to him" God told him and he wrote it

2 Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

There are plenty more similar verses about being set apart and known before birth..

Galatians 1:15
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,

Isaiah 49:1
Listen to me, O coastlands, and give attention, you peoples from afar. The Lord called me from the womb, from the body of my mother he named my name.

Psalm 22:9-10
Yet you are he who took me from the womb; you made me trust you at my mother's breasts. On you was I cast from my birth, and from my mother's womb you have been my God.

 

[mcarans]

Remarkable to see how radically the evangelical position has shifted in just a few decades eg. from this Christianity Today article by evangelical professor Brude Waltke from 1968:

The Old Testament and Birth Control

Waltke was then a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary and his logic is as follows:

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: ‘If a man kills any human life he will be put to death’ (Lev. 24:17). But according to (Exodus 21:22–24), the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense. … Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Some people fallaciously discriminate against humans based upon the level of development, dependency, or location of residence.

But you are not one of those ?

When in a burning house with crying little girl on the left and two fertilized eggs on glass vial ready to be transplanted to host mother on the right you and you could just grab one or the other you would take the fertilized eggs over the little girl since you could save two people instead of one ?

Feel free to lie to yourself about this one.

 

[Archivist]

Of course all believers agree when personhood begins.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)

No, all believers do not agree on when life begins. Scripture also tells us that God breathed into Adam the breath of life. Our Jewish friends and many Christians believe that this means that life begins with the first breath. Scripture also tells us that John leapt in his mother’s womb. Many Christians therefore believe that life begins with quickening. You are, of course, free to your own personal beliefs but they are just that, personal.

 

[SPF]

Remarkable to see how radically the evangelical position has shifted in just a few decades eg. from this Christianity Today article by evangelical professor Brude Waltke from 1968:

The Old Testament and Birth Control

Waltke was then a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary and his logic is as follows:

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: ‘If a man kills any human life he will be put to death’ (Lev. 24:17). But according to (Exodus 21:22–24), the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense. … Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”

Yes, it’s good to see that the evangelical position has shifted away from that and towards a more correct view.

But you are not one of those ?

When in a burning house with crying little girl on the left and two fertilized eggs on glass vial ready to be transplanted to host mother on the right you and you could just grab one or the other you would take the fertilized eggs over the little girl since you could save two people instead of one ?

Feel free to lie to yourself about this one.

And exactly how does this example demonstrate that one has more inherent, God given moral worth and value over the other?

If my house was on fire and I my 3 year old son and the neighbors 3 year old daughter were in the house and I only had the ability to save one, I would save my son. Does this mean I think boys are more morally valuable than girls?

If my house was on fire and I only had the capacity to save either my wife or 5 of my adult male friends, I would save my wife. Does this mean I think adult women are more inherently morally valuable than adult men?

The morality of abortion stands or falls with how we understand the nature of the life inside the womb. If we agree with science and Scripture that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization and that all human beings possess inherent moral worth and value.... Then it’s easy to see that the 98.5% of abortions committed for convenience reasons are immoral.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

And exactly how does this example demonstrate that one has more inherent, God given moral worth and value over the other?

It does not. It only makes hyporcrites out of people who say it makes no difference to them and they would still grab the screaming girl every time.