• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Biologically, when does human life begin?

Biologically, when does human life begin?

  • Conception

  • Heartbeat/Brain activity detected

  • Viability

  • Birth

  • Some other time - explain


Results are only viewable after voting.
Though Canada has no limit on when an abortion can take place, the usual cut off point is 24 weeks, after that most doctors will only do an abortion under extreme circumstances. So the number 24 seems about right.
Canada doesn't seem to have the issues with abortion that we do. Canada is doing it right. There should not be any restrictions on abortion. But some here seriously think that if there we're no restrictions, women would suddenly seek elective late tewrem abortions.
 
Canada doesn't seem to have the issues with abortion that we do. Canada is doing it right. There should not be any restrictions on abortion. But some here seriously think that if there we're no restrictions, women would suddenly seek elective late tewrem abortions.
Some do, but only under extreme circumstances, a damaged fetus or risk to mother's life. Not the on demand abortion Righties seem to think women take in late term abortions.
 
So when does human life begin?
Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.

Most liberals ignore the science associated with the beginning of human life. For them the fetus becomes a person when they are born. But the movement to confer legal personhood on fetuses, zygotes, and even fertilized eggs pre-birth has been gaining legal ground for years.
 
I'm following your logic. If an organism cannot reason, doesn't understand their own mortality, cannot respond to ideas, then they aren't human life. Right?
I have previously included the ability to learn those concepts. IOW, a born human child that has not yet learned those concepts is still human life imo.
 
Canada doesn't seem to have the issues with abortion that we do. Canada is doing it right. There should not be any restrictions on abortion. But some here seriously think that if there we're no restrictions, women would suddenly seek elective late tewrem abortions.
Even if its a needle in a fetus's head a few hours before birth.
 
Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.

Most liberals ignore the science associated with the beginning of human life. For them the fetus becomes a person when they are born. But the movement to confer legal personhood on fetuses, zygotes, and even fertilized eggs pre-birth has been gaining legal ground for years.

Really? Post 140:

The thread title is "Biologically, when does human life begin?"

“A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm…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.” The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud, Mark G. Torchia

✨

“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.” From Human Embryology & Teratology, Ronan R. O’Rahilly, Fabiola Muller.

✨

Diane Irving, M.A., Ph.D, sums up much of the scientific consensus in her research at Princeton University:

“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.”

✨

Only proper understanding of the process of human embryogenesis enables answering scientifically the question when the life cycle of human individual starts. Therefore, in the following text the main steps of the human developmental process are going to be briefly described, primarily during the first 15 days after fertilization.

A human being originates from two living cells: the oocyte and the spermatozoon transmitting the torch of life to the next generation.

THE FACTS AND DOUBTS ABOUT BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN LIFE AND PERSONALITY - PMC


pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

✨

The Scientific Consensus on When a Human's Life Begins
Peer-reviewed journals in the biological and life sciences literature have published articles that represent the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization ("the fertilization view"). As those statements are typically offered without explanation or citation, the fertilization view seems to be uncontested by the editors, reviewers, and authors who contribute to scientific journals. Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.

The Scientific Consensus on When a Human's Life Begins - PubMed

Peer-reviewed journals in the biological and life sciences literature have published articles that represent the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization ("the fertilization view"). As those statements are typically offered without explanation or citation, the fertilization...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

✨

When Human Life Begins - American College of Pediatricians – March 2017
The predominance of human biological research confirms that human life begins at conception—fertilization. At fertilization, the human being emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the species Homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in order to grow and develop.

When Human Life Begins - American College of Pediatricians

American College of Pediatricians – March 2017 ABSTRACT: The predominance [...]
acpeds.org

✨

Does science define life as "beginning at conception"?
Overall, 95% of all biologists affirmed the biological view that a human's life begins at fertilization (5212 out of 5502).

Does science define life as "beginning at conception"?

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a
skeptics.stackexchange.com
 
Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.

Most liberals ignore the science associated with the beginning of human life. For them the fetus becomes a person when they are born. But the movement to confer legal personhood on fetuses, zygotes, and even fertilized eggs pre-birth has been gaining legal ground for years.
The beginning of life and when one becomes a person are two different things and making them one is a conflation fallacy
 
Some do, but only under extreme circumstances, a damaged fetus or risk to mother's life. Not the on demand abortion Righties seem to think women take in late term abortions.
Indeed. But some anti abortionists seem to think a lack of restrictions will result in medical "open season" of abortions.
 
Even if its a needle in a fetus's head a few hours before birth.
WOW, that is such a lame argument I am loathe to respond.
Typically Canada allows an abortion during any time of the pregnancy, but it rarely ever happens after 24 weeks, and then only in extreme cases.
For anyone to make such an uninformed, childish, and ridiculous statement as you made boggles the mind, but then we are used to simple-minded thinking that is totally void of reality or even reason.
 
I have previously included the ability to learn those concepts. IOW, a born human child that has not yet learned those concepts is still human life imo.

An unborn human also has the ability to someday learn those concepts.

Are born humans who cannot learn these things still human life?
 
Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view.

Most liberals ignore the science associated with the beginning of human life. For them the fetus becomes a person when they are born. But the movement to confer legal personhood on fetuses, zygotes, and even fertilized eggs pre-birth has been gaining legal ground for years.

"Person" is a legal label. A human does become a legal person at birth. That doesn't negate the science behind human development that shows human life begins at conception.
 
The like was giving you credit for a unique argument. Not agreement.

And I don’t care how emotionally attached some folks seem to being “unique life”

Perhaps we should start worrying more about LIVING CHILDREN and less on ZEFs.

I’m so tired of so much attention being paid to the potential for another damn human life and so little given to protecting the living humans already on this planet.

Priorities are so ****ed up

Just curious - would you fight against employees asking for bereavement time off after a miscarriage or still birth?
 
Just curious - would you fight against employees asking for bereavement time off after a miscarriage or still birth?
Bereavement policies should never require disclosure of why the time is being taken.

I’ve fought against employers setting parameters around when or for what reason employees can take the time.

So I don’t care what a person takes bereavement leave for. I’d support someone’s right to take their paid time off (or bereavement leave that FYI rarely exists in corporate companies in my experience) for their dog if that’s what they wanted to do.

It’s a part of your compensation package, use it as you see fit. Employees are adults and should be trusted to make decisions and act as such.
 
Bereavement policies should never require disclosure of why the time is being taken.

I’ve fought against employers setting parameters around when or for what reason employees can take the time.

So I don’t care what a person takes bereavement leave for. I’d support someone’s right to take their paid time off (or bereavement leave that FYI rarely exists in corporate companies in my experience) for their dog if that’s what they wanted to do.

It’s a part of your compensation package, use it as you see fit. Employees are adults and should be trusted to make decisions and act as such.

Good to hear.

I look forward to your responses to the replies a few posts back.
 
Don’t hold your breath 😂

Oh, I'm not. You've side-stepped many attempts at debating your points. It's hard to defend something that doesn't make scientific sense.
 
Oh, I'm not. You've side-stepped many attempts at debating your points. It's hard to defend something that doesn't make scientific sense.

This ⬆️ is clearly the most hypocritical post in the thread. Since you refuse to do so, except in a few "select" cases. It's not a complaint tho, just an observation that even with the posted proof of your own statements on when human life begins, you chose to harangue and debate others, instead of using that proof. You are here only for the churn, not to debate facts in good faith.
 
Last edited:
Its still a ZEF. But its not separate.

I believe that you misunderstood my question. So allow me to be more specific. A tapeworm is a parasite. It is not a ZEF, we are not talking about ZEFs for the purpose of this question to your assertion, which is why I said
the parasite (not the ZEF)
So once again, does the parasite (the tapeworm, not the ZEF) cease to be a tapeworm life when it becomes part of her, or him as the case may be? As review this question is based off of
It is physically occupying, attached to, and feeding off the woman's body like a parasite. It absolutely is a "part of her."


No one is really arguing whether "life" starts at conception or not.

Yes, yes may of us are. Read the posts.
 
BirdInHand is by saying that life doesn't start until birth.
She is quite capable of speaking for herself.
But, you have a bad habit of not quoting people precisely.
I doubt that is what she actually said. Please quote what you are referring to.
 
Back
Top Bottom