I actually researched those "scientific" citations you referred to from an original post. I decided not to reply to that earlier post because you seem to have no idea what you were citing. I just assumed you got your quotes from some pro-life website. Like this one:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=630377690415631&id=445605908892811
Did you actually read the source materials yourself? Wherever I could find them myself,
I did!
Your first citation, "Langman's Medical Embryology" is a
textbook on embryology first published in
1963. The 6th edition was published in
1991. It is currently in its 13th edition (2015). I could not find the 6th edition, but a perusal of any of the editions found online (starting with the 9th edition published in 2009) shows that it does use scientific terms in discussing ZEF development, and uses the word "Human" as an identifier much like other biological descriptions use similar terms (like reptile, simian, etc.).
However, NOWHERE does it state "an unborn child is a
human being at conception."
Your second citation, "Maternal Bonding in Early Fetal Ultrasound Examinations" is an article written in
1983 discussing "
two cases in which women in the late first or early second trimester of pregnancy
reported feelings and thoughts clearly indicating a bond of loyalty toward the fetus." Hardly a comprehensive study.
MMS: Error
Your third citation, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology. I could not find the book online (and I don't feel like a trip to a library in hopes of finding it). So in the interests of fair play, I'll concede that this book may have made such a statement. However, there are a number of educated people who support your positon and use such terms in hopes of increasing that support. That does not mean they are correct. :shrug:
Your third citation, "Human Embryology & Teratology" was published in
1996 and the most recent edition is the 3rd published in 2001. This is the actual quote from that "voice for children" site from the book: "Fertilization is an important landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct
human organism is thereby formed..." That is a far cry from
human being.
Interesting that all of your citations are decades old.
In any case even if every one of your citations actually supported your position (which they do not) it is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the vast majority of texts which refer to the ZEF as "Human" development, but not as a Human Being.