When Does Human Life Begin?

[jmotivator]

I figured that for sake of future reference I would provide this scientific white paper by Professor Maureen L. Condic, Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, that discusses the scientific approach to the determination for when human life begins.

When Does Human Life Begin?(pdf)

Summary:

Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a rea-
soned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article
considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two
central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg
interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg?
and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based
on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into
existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a
second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of
events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic
development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm
or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the
life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of
conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and
independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life
or of human embryos.

 

[joG]

I figured that for sake of future reference I would provide this scientific white paper by Professor Maureen L. Condic, Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, that discusses the scientific approach to the determination for when human life begins.

When Does Human Life Begin?(pdf)

Summary:

Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a rea-
soned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article
considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two
central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg
interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg?
and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based
on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into
existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a
second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of
events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic
development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm
or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the
life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of
conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and
independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life
or of human embryos.

I guess that that is a good definition, though you could make the case for sperm and egg to be human life too. But that is not important with respect to abortion.


I do not think many pro-abortion people will follow you there.

 

[MrT]

"Sometimes, conception creates more than one life—twins or triplets, but then one of those lives is absorbed into the body of another—fetal resorption. It really is not clear how many lives can be started at the moment of conception, and to say that a person always begins at conception is patently false."

"The biggest empirical problem with the view that personhood begins at conception is the scientific fact that a large percentage of embryos lack the capacity, under any circumstances, to become human beings. During the period of embryonic development that begins with fertilization and ends a few days later with successful implantation of the blastocyst into the uterine wall—the period known as 'preimplantation development'—up to 50 percent of human conceptions fail to survive, most likely due to genetic errors in the embryo."

https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/articles/5639

"A starting point that is far more consistent with the facts of biology is not conception but the emergence of the human brain. We declare persons dead when their brains have lost the capacity to govern the core functions necessary for life—breathing, excretion, and the like. When a fetus has developed a brain that can support its basic biological functions, probably at around six months of life, it can be reasonably argued that personhood has begun."

 

[WCH]

"Sometimes, conception creates more than one life—twins or triplets, but then one of those lives is absorbed into the body of another—fetal resorption. It really is not clear how many lives can be started at the moment of conception, and to say that a person always begins at conception is patently false."

"The biggest empirical problem with the view that personhood begins at conception is the scientific fact that a large percentage of embryos lack the capacity, under any circumstances, to become human beings. During the period of embryonic development that begins with fertilization and ends a few days later with successful implantation of the blastocyst into the uterine wall—the period known as 'preimplantation development'—up to 50 percent of human conceptions fail to survive, most likely due to genetic errors in the embryo."

https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/articles/5639

"A starting point that is far more consistent with the facts of biology is not conception but the emergence of the human brain. We declare persons dead when their brains have lost the capacity to govern the core functions necessary for life—breathing, excretion, and the like. When a fetus has developed a brain that can support its basic biological functions, probably at around six months of life, it can be reasonably argued that personhood has begun."

Well there's the Communist POV......life but, not a person

 

[JayDubya]

When the organism's lifespan begins, at fertilization, in the zygote stage of life.

Indisputable and unassailable scientific fact.



/thread?

 

[MrT]

Well there's the Communist POV......life but, not a person

Communist!? WTF? ROFL.

 

[MrT]

When the organism's lifespan begins, at fertilization, in the zygote stage of life.

Indisputable and unassailable scientific fact.

/thread?

So wait...is it when when a sperm reaches an egg, when it penetrates the egg, when genetic recombination begins, or when a new genome is formed?

 

[WCH]

Communist!? WTF? ROFL.

Secular humanists are mostly far Leftists.

 

[Riveroaks]

I figured that for sake of future reference I would provide this scientific white paper by Professor Maureen L. Condic, Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, that discusses the scientific approach to the determination for when human life begins.

When Does Human Life Begin?(pdf)

Summary:

Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a rea-
soned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article
considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two
central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg
interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg?
and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based
on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into
existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a
second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of
events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic
development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm
or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the
life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of
conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and
independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life
or of human embryos.

Choice is primarily a political issue, and the last time I checked, the majority of women prefer the right of choice over other political solutions.

As a legal issue, the SCOTUS has already ruled in Roe V. Wade that choice shall be Federal law all across the nation.

So why are you kicking over this hornets nest now?

Is it because there is a national election coming up in the near future ?!

I really wish this hot button item would go away and that the two major parties would each give it a rest.

 

[Riveroaks]

Secular humanists are mostly far Leftists.

Secular = non-religious

Humanist = of or pertaining to human rights

Leftist = pro government, pro taxation, pro spending, pro social programs.

I take it by doing the algrebra that this is what you are trying to say then, WCH?

I have noticed that you are indeed scholarly and therefore I am just trying to follow you, is all.

 

[Riveroaks]

When the organism's lifespan begins, at fertilization, in the zygote stage of life.

Indisputable and unassailable scientific fact.



/thread?

Unsupported and premature opinion only. Very weak. Let the shouting and chanting begin.

 

[Riveroaks]

I guess that that is a good definition, though you could make the case for sperm and egg to be human life too. But that is not important with respect to abortion.


I do not think many pro-abortion people will follow you there.

Definitions contain the fallacy of most philosophies whether political or otherwise.

 

[jmotivator]

Well there's the Communist POV......life but, not a person

Which is a definition that follows a communist their whole life.

 

[jmotivator]

So wait...is it when when a sperm reaches an egg, when it penetrates the egg, when genetic recombination begins, or when a new genome is formed?

How about you read the OP? It defines the scientific definition quite well.

 

[jmotivator]

"Sometimes, conception creates more than one life—twins or triplets, but then one of those lives is absorbed into the body of another—fetal resorption. It really is not clear how many lives can be started at the moment of conception, and to say that a person always begins at conception is patently false."

"The biggest empirical problem with the view that personhood begins at conception is the scientific fact that a large percentage of embryos lack the capacity, under any circumstances, to become human beings. During the period of embryonic development that begins with fertilization and ends a few days later with successful implantation of the blastocyst into the uterine wall—the period known as 'preimplantation development'—up to 50 percent of human conceptions fail to survive, most likely due to genetic errors in the embryo."

https://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php/articles/5639

"A starting point that is far more consistent with the facts of biology is not conception but the emergence of the human brain. We declare persons dead when their brains have lost the capacity to govern the core functions necessary for life—breathing, excretion, and the like. When a fetus has developed a brain that can support its basic biological functions, probably at around six months of life, it can be reasonably argued that personhood has begun."

So before the human brain develops in the developing human is there some chance that life will throw a curve ball and develop them into a fish for something instead? :roll:

How about you read the scientific justification provided as a counter argument for the unscientific secular humanist justification.

 

[Erod]

If you leave the fertilized egg alone, one day he or she might become president or cure cancer. Life irrefutably begins at conception.

 

[JumpinJack]

I figured that for sake of future reference I would provide this scientific white paper by Professor Maureen L. Condic, Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, that discusses the scientific approach to the determination for when human life begins.

When Does Human Life Begin?(pdf)

Summary:

Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a rea-
soned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article
considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two
central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg
interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg?
and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based
on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into
existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a
second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of
events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic
development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm
or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the
life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of
conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and
independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life
or of human embryos.

When the fetus can live outside of another person's body, even with medical assistance. Human beings don't live inside of other human beings and don't rely on living inside of someone else's body to be alive.

We know generally how young a fetus can be and survive because of the preemies that are born early. I think it's several months old, even though the preemie may have significant medical issues, such as blindness, since they are not fully developed. Still, hospitals can keep them alive sometimes long enough to develop further and live.

 

[prometeus]

If you leave the fertilized egg alone, one day he or she might become president or cure cancer.

Which bring up the question of who ****ed with the fertilized eggs that became Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and all the other douche bags in history?

 

[Removable Mind]

I figured that for sake of future reference I would provide this scientific white paper by Professor Maureen L. Condic, Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Utah School of Medicine, that discusses the scientific approach to the determination for when human life begins.

When Does Human Life Begin?(pdf)

Summary:

Resolving the question of when human life begins is critical for advancing a rea-
soned public policy debate over abortion and human embryo research. This article
considers the current scientific evidence in human embryology and addresses two
central questions concerning the beginning of life: 1) in the course of sperm-egg
interaction, when is a new cell formed that is distinct from either sperm or egg?
and 2) is this new cell a new human organism—i.e., a new human being? Based
on universally accepted scientific criteria, a new cell, the human zygote, comes into
existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion, an event that occurs in less than a
second. Upon formation, the zygote immediately initiates a complex sequence of
events that establish the molecular conditions required for continued embryonic
development. The behavior of the zygote is radically unlike that of either sperm
or egg separately and is characteristic of a human organism. Thus, the scientific
evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the
life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined “moment of
conception.” This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and
independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life
or of human embryos.

This all brings us to SO WHAT! If a live human sperm and egg become fertilized. Gosh, it's not rocket science that they create a stage of human life. NOBODY DENIES that.

About 20% of zygotes and embryos never implant. They are flushed away with a woman's menstrual cycles. Who ya gonna blame for the death of those stages of human life. God, perhaps? All part of the big plan. And let's not forget all of the miscarriage women have. They happen at all developmental stages. Who ya gonna blame for the loss of these human lives?

And by the way, the term "human life" doesn't exempt any entity bearing that label from the inevitable, regardless of the stage of development or age outside the womb.

Religious views have different ideas about the "value" of a zygote, embryo, fetus. And different beliefs regarding ensoulment.

But just because a zygote, embryo, or fetus produced by two human beings - doesn't give it privileged domain over the born. They exist at the pleasure of the women who hosts their presence. At least up to the stage of viability.

 

[Lursa]

Here's the disconnect: a need to try not to use religion or other beliefs as a basis for objecting to abortion, so pro-life supporters try to use science. Neither side disputes the biological facts of human DNA and human development. This is objective science.

However the value placed on that human DNA and those stages are subjective. Science confers no value….only people do.

Hmmm, me too. I adore micro and epidemiology.

So you should know that science is objective and applies no value to anything. Value is subjective.

We do know that the unborn is human, it has human DNA and is species Homo sapiens. No one here (generally) disputes that.

But a person, a human being, is composed of many more attributes than just DNA. The value applied to those attributes is subjective, and the US courts have ruled clearly on the equality of humans more than once. (Blacks, women, the unborn...)

Hey, if anyone wants to ask the mods to pin a post in this sub-forum that demonstrates that unborn humans are Homo sapiens, and clearly shows all the stages of human development, sounds fine to me. I didnt see the need, but it does seem to come up alot.

 

[QuadpolarNutjob]

human life begins at the moment a democrat can no longer profit from human death.

 

[jmotivator]

When the fetus can live outside of another person's body, even with medical assistance. Human beings don't live inside of other human beings and don't rely on living inside of someone else's body to be alive.

We know generally how young a fetus can be and survive because of the preemies that are born early. I think it's several months old, even though the preemie may have significant medical issues, such as blindness, since they are not fully developed. Still, hospitals can keep them alive sometimes long enough to develop further and live.

This isn't a satisfactory scientific definition. There is no clear demarcation. Your "human beings don't live inside other human beings" argument is begging the question and therefor unsuitable as a scientific or a philosophic justification.

Moreover, using this definition the Democrats twice this week supported a position that supported the death of human beings.

At least Biden is honest about it.

 

[AGENT J]

When the organism's lifespan begins, at fertilization, in the zygote stage of life.

Indisputable and unassailable scientific fact.



/thread?

LMAO except the fact that many SCIENTIST and even embryologist disagree with you

ooooooops another posted lie of yours completely fails

 

[MrT]

So before the human brain develops in the developing human is there some chance that life will throw a curve ball and develop them into a fish for something instead? :roll:

How about you read the scientific justification provided as a counter argument for the unscientific secular humanist justification.

Your post is not a scientific justification - it a white paper that is hosted on a blog.

And no, the embryo will not develop into a fish, but it very well could (and in fact does in 50% of the time) develop into death.

 

[jmotivator]

Here's the disconnect: a need to try not to use religion or other beliefs as a basis for objecting to abortion, so pro-life supporters try to use science. Neither side disputes the biological facts of human DNA and human development. This is objective science.

However the value placed on that human DNA and those stages are subjective. Science confers no value….only people do..

So long as all pro-choice people accept your concession that the argument in favor of abortion is simply an endeavor to devalue the life of objectively defined human beings...