Posted on 09/08/2008 8:30:13 AM PDT by Prime Mover
I've been arguing with a pro-choice relative of mine, and she made the following statement:
"If life begins at conception, do identical twins only have half a soul?"
I know the science of how "twinning" occurs. A single fertilized egg splits and then both halves implant in the uterus.
But since conception involved one egg and one sperm only, if life began at that moment, wouldn't that indicate only one soul?
I'm interested in any theological arguments that have been made in this area.
Thanks
By her line of reasoning, a twin would need only half of the amount of faith to get to heaven.
And a triplet would need even less.
Doesn’t matter. If there’s doubt, why take a chance?
So, if I was one of a set of sextuplets, I MIGHT have a chance at getting into heaven...
;^)
Ping - any thoughts on this?
Here’s a good, short answer:
“If it’s not a baby then you’re not pregnant”.
Notice that the question begins with an equivocation: it starts by asking about a scientific question (when does life begin), and then it immediately shifts to a theological issue (do identical twins have half a soul). That is standard practice in abortion debates.
My advice is to stick to the science.
Twinning does not mean that embryos are not alive. Single celled organism and other more primitive life forms reproduce by twinning (budding). They are furthermore unquestionably members of the species Homo sapiens. That is the species of their parents, they are alive, so embryos are immature members of their parents species.
This establishes the point that twinning is a red herring. Do all immature human beings have a soul? That is equivalent to asking - do all immature human beings have a right to life? There is no scientific experiment that can find a soul in an embryo. But neither is there a scientific experiment that can find a soul in a newborn, but I’ll bet that your pro-choice friends are opposed to infanticide. There is no scientific experiment that can find a soul in an adult, but I’ll bet your pro-choice friends are opposed to killing adults.
The end result is that we can either divide members of the species Homo sapiens into those who have rights and those who can be legally killed, or we can defend the rights of all Homo sapiens. I find the second option far more morally commendable.
This is not a theological question. It is a demonstration that your acquaintance has a hardened heart and mind.
She is using a scientific argument to argue a theological one. Apples an oranges. Scientifically it is a FACT that at conception human life begins. It is that simple. Theology does not matter. The question then is when is it legal to kill human life. Leave out all the legal mumbo jumbo of legal personhood. She can not win the scientific argument.
So, I guess twin “B” only has half a life. (After all, “life” only started once according to this foolish reasoning.)
Then again, half a life is better than no life at all.
(I’ll make sure I tell my twin grandsons that only one of them is really alive. Maybe that will save on diaper costs.)
Seriously, here is an explanation I found on it: http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=16880
You could go on to say that G-d knew those two souls would exist from the beginning of time. Making the embryo split was just a means to get to that end.
Again, don't know if she threw out the soul argument to throw you off or if she really wants to know.
Body and spirit are separate entities. Spirit does not split itself up to inhabit multiple bodies in the womb. Each body is inhabited by a single individual.
By the tenets of my church this human life is a period of testing wherein each spirit is given the opportunity to live life in such a way as to return to God or not according to the choices made in mortality and a mortal body is vital to this test. To deny a body to a spirit is to deny that spirit it’s opportunity at salvation and eternal joy.
Excellent post.
That’s why there is always a good twin and an evil twin.
No, seriously, the infusion of a soul into human flesh is not something that can objectively studied. If faith is involved then we know that the Pslamist speaks of “while in my mother’s womb, you knew me”.
Since, as an issue of faith, we know that a person dwells in a mother’s womb, then we know that the soul, which is what a person is, exists before birth.
Add to that the science that at conception there is a new version of human DNA, and you have a fairly compelling argument that the death of even a fertalized egg is the destruction of an individual human body and, from a faith point of view, has a very good chance of the destruction of an individual human soul.
Why should identical twins have only half a soul? They do not, after all, have half a body...
At the instant of fertilisation, a zygote is created. The new cell has all the genetic material (and the genetic wherewithal) to make a Human being. We do not know what that Human being will turn out to be like, because we are not completely the construct of our genes. Environmental factors do count, and one of them is whether the embryo will split (and also when it does). Actually, even twinning is at least partially genetically controlled (it does seem to “run” in families).
They wouldn’t have half a soul any more than they would have half a brain, half a heart, half a kidney, etc. It was just a flippant question to throw you off your game.
If life doesn’t begin at conception then why wear a condom or take birth control
Above my pay grade....but I do know that abortion is MURDER.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.