Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
At best, that passages says that a Christian should not associate with such people. A far cry from shaming and stigmatizing them.
There's a big difference there.I even underlined it. Oh well my time hopefully was not wasted on sincere lurkers.
14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
I explained it to you, but I can't understand it for you.A fact is based on actual sources. You haven't provided any.
Conception begins a biological process that has the potential to eventually produce one or more human beings. But because human beings are distinct and quantifiable while zygotes are not, a zygote cannot be a human being.That human life begins at conception is a biological fact:
We can argue about semantics all day, but it doesn't change the fact that 95% of all biologists agree that a new human being starts its development at fertilization.Conception begins a biological process that has the potential to eventually produce one or more human beings. But because human beings are distinct and quantifiable while zygotes are not, a zygote cannot be a human being.
Your linked article contains blatant inaccuracies, such as this quote: "While this article’s findings suggest a fetus is biologically classified as a human at fertilization...", which is absurd, because a fetus does not exist at fertilization. As such, it cannot be taken seriously.
All of which requires pulling nutrients from the woman’s body to construct its own body. This should require explicit permission.Yet another excuse used by the pro-choicers.
Parallel with brain death
The irreversible cessation of brain function indicates the death of a human being. Some people argue, then, that the life of a human being cannot begin until brain activity begins.
But the reason (total) brain death matters is that it means the body can no longer function as an integrated whole (even if some cells and tissues are still alive). The brain, in older humans, is essential for that purpose. Before the development of the brain in the first place, however, the very young embryo does not require it in order to function as an organism and direct her own growth (including the development of her brain).
Thus, while a brain-dead patient is a corpse in the process of decay, an embryo is a living and growing individual.
From: The unborn is a human being: What science tells us about unborn children
There is also a big difference between then and now. Certainly today's standards and culture were very different. There was a time when a woman would not wear a dress which did not cover her ankles. It was shameful for them to do so. And people in that time and culture would have reacted towards them as shameful people. Similar to "shunning" which goes on in an "amish" community. No communication or involvement with the individual as though they were dead to them. Eveyone from your parents, siblings and the entire community treat you like you are dead. One thing has never changed, the wicked feel no shame at anything, not anything. Excuses when they get caught (serial killers) are simply manipulation.There's a big difference there.
If I refuse to spend time with someone, then that is all I am doing. I'm simply saying, "I don't wish to spend time with you." If they decide to feel shame, that's on them. My decision doesn't cause them shame, since there are plenty of people I'm sure who would not feel shame that I don't want to spend time with them.
However, if I shame someone, then I'd be going around telling everyone how bad they are.
Do you remember that episode of the Simpsons where Nelson laughs at the tall man in the small car? And remember how the tall man shames Nelson in front of the whole town? That's shaming someone. Do you think Nelson would have been shamed like that if the tall guy just decided he didn't want to spend time with Nelson? Of course not.
So there's a big difference.
Separate from the identical twin that forms later? Which means the twin comes into existence *after* conception?Being a separate and complete organism of the species homo sapiens makes the embryo a human by the very definition of the term.
I proved that your source gets basic terminology wrong and therefore cannot be taken seriously.You are free to disagree with science of course, but "explaining to me" your opinion doesn't make your opinion a fact. You still haven't provided any credible sources for your opinion.
It is a separate organism prior to twinning already, and 99% of embryos don't twin at all. If you want to say that 1 human splits into 2 humans, that's correct. Such is the biology of the human species at that stage of development.Separate from the identical twin that forms later? Which means the twin comes into existence *after* conception?
Wrong!All of which requires pulling nutrients from the woman’s body to construct its own body. This should require explicit permission.
Nothing there to contradict a growing fetus uses nutrients from the mother.Wrong!
"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"
From: WHEN DO HUMAN BEINGS BEGIN? "SCIENTIFIC" MYTHS AND SCIENTIFIC FACTS
I'm not confused about it at all. Because you don't know if twinning is going to occur until it happens, then at conception you don't have grounds to quantify the number of potential human(s) who are currently developing. The best you can say is maybe one, maybe two, possibly even three, but most likely zero. And that lack of quantifiability (if that's a word) is the problem with your argument. A 8.5 months, there is no problem quantifying the number of babies in the womb. At four hours after conception, you really don't have a clue.If you are so confused about twinning then an understandable position of yours would be to say that human development starts after twinning or, if no twinning occurs, at fertilization.
You aren't a Christian but I suppose you are familiar with the story of Adam and Eve anyway. Would you say that Adam was a human before Eve was created from Adam? That Eve was made from Adam doesn't mean Adam himself didn't exist as a human prior to that point.I'm not confused about it at all. Because you don't know if twinning is going to occur until it happens, then at conception you don't have grounds to quantify the number of potential human(s) who are currently developing. The best you can say is maybe one, maybe two, possibly even three, but most likely zero. And that lack of quantifiability (if that's a word) is the problem with your argument. A 8.5 months, there is no problem quantifying the number of babies in the womb. At four hours after conception, you really don't have a clue.
My response would be that neither ever existed, so there's no point in arguing about them.You aren't a Christian but I suppose you are familiar with the story of Adam and Eve anyway. Would you say that Adam was a human before Eve was created from Adam? That Eve was made from Adam doesn't mean Adam himself didn't exist as a human prior to that point.
Lets say conception has occurred on a Monday, and the zygote is going to split into identical twins on Thursday. But the woman takes an abortafacient on Wednesday, thus ending the pregnancy. How many deaths occurred?Similarly, there is 1 embryo at the beginning, and it's a full human. Whether this full human is turned into 2 full humans or not doesn't negate the fact that the 1 human exists.
My point is that once you stipulate that life begins after conception, it's just a matter of deciding where to draw the line. Also, they're not babies int the 3rd week.Btw, twinning can only occur during the first 2 weeks of development, so that would be your deadline. If you are so concerned about the number of babies in the womb, you can safely quantify them in the 3rd week. No need to wait 8.5 months.
As many as there were zygotes at the time the medication took effect.Lets say conception has occurred on a Monday, and the zygote is going to split into identical twins on Thursday. But the woman takes an abortafacient on Wednesday, thus ending the pregnancy. How many deaths occurred?
Twinning is not an argument in your favor, as twinning can only occur if a human exists already. Otherwise there is nobody to be twinned.My point is that once you stipulate that life begins after conception, it's just a matter of deciding where to draw the line.
So? A person's intake of nutrients increases when they're pregnant, how does it affect the mother?Nothing there to contradict a growing fetus uses nutrients from the mother.
If the baby is the one being killed, it's the mother that requires "explicit permission".This should require explicit permission.
This should require explicit permission.
The life-cycle starts at conception and ends when a person dies.My point is that once you stipulate that life begins after conception, it's just a matter of deciding where to draw the line. Also, they're not babies int the 3rd week.
Women who carry to term will tell you their bodies are changed permanently. Just because it is what we evolved to do does not mean it doesn’t come at a physical cost.So? A person's intake of nutrients increases when they're pregnant, how does it affect the mother?
If the baby is the one being killed, it's the mother that requires "explicit permission".
When you engage in the child-making-act you are taking the risk of getting pregnant and therefore grant permission to another human to grow inside you.Those who choose termination are not granting explicit permission for the use of their bodies to grow another human.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?