Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1010RD
I think a strong argument can be made against the “life begins at conception” belief, one that meets both a scientific and a religious standard fully in keeping with Christian values. Leave a fertilized egg alone and it will not turn into a baby. It will not live. Instead it will wither and die due to a lack of vital nutrients and hormones all necessary for growth.

Given that eggs, both fertilized and unfertilized can be passed out of a woman’s body without producing life what are the circumstances that lead to life? Only when that fertilized egg attaches to the uterine wall whereby those nutrients and hormones can be supplied does life begin. This occurs about 7 days after conception. When would God send a spirit to this little baby - at conception when it cannot sustain life or at this point when life can be sustained?

The argument that “life begins at conception” is unscientific. It also fails to meet the basic understanding of God and the nature of this world. If one moves away from “conception” and toward implantation you have a sustainable argument.

From a strictly scientific point of view, life is a property which is contained within both the sperm and the egg. If neither of them possess that property, fertilization will not occur. The fertilized ovum has the property of being alive, also. By the time implantation occurs, if that ovum is so lucky, the blastocyst already contains several cells. There is never a point during the process of oogenesis, spermatogenesis, fertilization, implantation, or pregnancy at which life is not present. If, at any time, the property of being alive disappears, it will not return.

I do not try to distinguish "when life can be sustained" because there is no defining point when that occurs. Indeed, it is a matter of opinion as to when life may be considered to be sustainable. Seriously, most of us depend on others to live.

64 posted on 09/11/2012 6:52:21 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom

I understand that, but a human being is the union of a soul and a body. Not just a body. At what point does “life” gain a soul? Does the sperm have a soul? The egg?

At some point it becomes a human being. It isn’t a human being when it is just an egg or just a sperm. It doesn’t make sense to believe that every fertilized egg is a human soul.

All belief is a matter of opinion. Even science gets draped in opinion. We have to make decisions based on the best available evidence. Viability doesn’t begin at conception, but at implantation. Outside the womb using current technology it begins at about 22 weeks.

If all Americans could agree on those two terms it would end decades worth of vitriolic debate about innocent human life. If we allowed contraception that prevented implantation and limited abortion to viability we’d be much, much closer to the goal than we are now. You can get consensus around my definitions. The life begins at conception argument is nonsense on its face if you’re discussing human life and not simply “life”.


65 posted on 09/12/2012 4:01:19 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson