Posted on 11/09/2001 10:54:51 AM PST by Asmodeus
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:31 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
As you think out your rational [sic], pretend you are really standing before God explaining it...
As you think out your position, pretend that you have the ability to use more of the gifts that God gave you.
FreeReign-->Current science can tell you when brain function and brain waves begin -- when thought processes begin and the human entity is formed.
Ravinson-->Apes have brain waves and share the vast majority of our (human) chromosones, but that doesn't make them persons, does it?
The point in time of brain wave development in apes, is the point in time when apes become apes. The point in time of brain wave development in humans, is the point in time when humans become -- humans.
Ravinson-->Actually, there are no provable "unalienable rights", only liberties and ethical dilemmas as to what types of liberties are deserving of respect. Osama bin Laden never had a "right to life" and neither do you, but there is a reason to respect the liberties of others who agree to do likewise.
Unalienable rights are your objective right to freedom -- they are rights endowed by objectivity. The specifics of unalienable rights are not provable only in the same sense that nothing is provable absolutely -- which also means that one should never use the word "Actually".
However, in our current relm of science -- the beginning of the human entity in the womb is provable scientifically and in our current relm of philosophy, the unalienable right of the human entity in the womb not to be killed is also real.
Depends on who's sunbathing on your lawn and what page in the book your on.
How's that for inanity trumping inanity?
If you would like a scientific discussion on your problem of discerning the difference between sperm, oocytes, somatic cells and human beings, try Dianne Irving's article, "When do human beings begin?" on Libertarians for Life, at
http://www.l4l.org/library/mythfact.html
or Prof. Anjelo Serra's article, "When did I begin?" at
http://www.lifeissues.net/bioethics/ser_01lifebegin.html
which reads, in part,
"It is important to stress that from this precise moment a new cell is active within which a highly complex cascade of processes clearly shows that the two gametes no longer work as two independent systems but, on the contrary, that a new system has been constituted which works as a unit, that is as a new being ontologically one. This new entity is biologically defined as a zygote or unicellular embryo."(emphasis original)
By this description, I would think legally you are a murderer (vehicular manslaughter).
Even assuming that you mean "point in time when a fetus becomes a person", you are ignoring other aspects of personage beyond brain activity, and you're still just stating an unproven philosophical theory about personage.
Unalienable rights are your objective right to freedom -- they are rights endowed by objectivity. The specifics of unalienable rights are not provable only in the same sense that nothing is provable absolutely -- which also means that one should never use the word "Actually".
No, liberties are provable, but "rights" are not. If, for example, you claim that you have a "right to life", then you are asserting that God would be violating your "right to life" by allowing lightning to strike you dead.
the beginning of the human entity in the womb is provable scientifically
You're wrong on this point also. Human life does not begin at conception, which is merely one stage in the uninterrupted continuum of human life. But, as stated, human life and personage are not the same thing.
So then you must believe that a sperm cell (i.e. human life) has a "right to life".
It is important to stress that from this precise moment a new cell is active within which a highly complex cascade of processes clearly shows that the two gametes no longer work as two independent systems but, on the contrary, that a new system has been constituted which works as a unit, that is as a new being ontologically one.
There is no "new system" being constituted at conception. The same "system" (i.e. the system of human existence) that produces a sperm cell (an "ontological one") produces a zygote when that sperm cell is introduced to an egg cell.
Can you point out the "obvious" for those of us who can't see it?
I can point it out but I can't force you to look at it, can I?
Yes. I think it has been taken as such legally for years.
Being "human" and being a "person" are not the same thing. If you don't believe me, ask a sperm cell. (By the way, you better check your science books again if you believe that newly joined sperm and egg cells have "brain waves".)
Nobody knows when the “soul” enters a Human shell; therefore it is not within yours or anybody’s judgment. In just a case it is always better to err on the side of caution. Do you know when a Fetus forms a brain, or has it’s own DNA. What about when it forms Hands or Feet?
Weeks 5-8 – Major changes now occur as the blueprint for your baby is laid down. His main organs begin to grow and the nervous system develops. The heart begins to beat at about week six and the limbs are developing. At first they look a bit like flippers, but gradually knee and elbow joints are formed. The face also begins to develop and the mouth and tongue are already visible. It is not until now that most women notice they are pregnant.
I think that sounds like a person to me, you want to kill him.
Lets not forget that the LAW considers a Fetus of any stage a “person”. Go ahead and kill a pregnant woman, you’ll see.
If you really believe that, then you must believe that every sperm and egg cell has a right to life regardless of the fact that they are dependent on people to bring them together and perpetuate the existence of their DNA.
When the Sperm and Egg have combined – YES. It is called conception.
So you confirm that you believe that all sperm and egg cells have a right to life.
See above
By engaging in such demagoguery, you are giving moral comfort to the people associated with the "Army of God". Moreover, neither your rhetoric nor the criminal acts it encourages will decrease the number of abortions. A much better strategy if you really want to minimize abortions would be to make your arguments without resorting to hyperbole, which only weakens your position.
You are making accusations that you have no proof of. Also where is the “hyperbole”?
and there is some scientific evidence to support my belief and which suggests that a "soul" is implanted in fetuses shortly before birth
Please provide the evidence. Your not making things up are you?
So then you must believe that a sperm cell (i.e. human life) has a "right to life".
You are debating the use of terms, real sign of wavering beliefs. You know very well that he was using the term “Human Life” as a independent human life of it’s own form and function (with or without support). Whether or not a “soul” resides (which you cannot prove) it is Human Life – a person.
You separation of Human and Person are a very scary, does the “soul” reside in a person in a vegetative state? If there is no “soul” is it ok to snuff out a life?
You're wrong on this point also. Human life does not begin at conception, which is merely one stage in the uninterrupted continuum of human life. But, as stated, human life and personage are not the same thing.
Please prove this and give us the exact moment Human Life does begin. If it is nothing more than “merely one stage in the uninterrupted continuum of human life” , at what point and who decides we should not kill it?
Manslaughter is distinguished from murder by being an unlawful killing of another without malice, but even manslaughter requires that the killer be at least guilty of recklessness (i.e. conscious disregard for life), which is beyond mere negligence. The scenario I presented deals with negligent homicide. If anti-abortion folks could prove that an aborted fetus was a person, then they would have a good argument that that abortion was a negligent homicide (or if illegal manslaughter), but not murder. Of course, the chant "abortion is negligent homicide" just doesn't arouse the emotions like the chant "abortion is murder", does it?
By the way, isn't it odd that "manslaughter" is spelled the same as "man's laughter".
Length: 3in
To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization — the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte — usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (an embryonic single-cell human zygote). 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.
To understand this, it should be remembered that each kind of living organism has a specific number and quality of chromosomes that are characteristic for each member of a species. (The number can vary only slightly if the organism is to survive.) For example, the characteristic number of chromosomes for a member of the human species is 46 (plus or minus, e.g., in human beings with Down's or Turner's syndromes). Every somatic (or, body) cell in a human being has this characteristic number of chromosomes. Even the early germ cells contain 46 chromosomes; it is only their most mature forms — the sex gametes, or sperms and oocytes — which will later contain only 23 chromosomes.1 Sperms and oocytes are derived from primitive germ cells in the developing fetus by means of the process known as "gametogenesis." Because each germ cell normally has 46 chromosomes, the process of "fertilization" can not take place until the total number of chromosomes in each germ are cut in half. This is necessary so that after their fusion at fertilization the characteristic number of chromosomes in a single individual member of the human species (46) can be maintained — otherwise we would end up with a monster of some sort.
To accurately see why a sperm or an oocyte are considered as only possessing human life, and not as living human beings themselves, one needs to look at the basic scientific facts involved in the processes of gametogenesis and of fertilization. It may help to keep in mind that the products of gametogenesis and fertilization are very different. The products of gametogenesis are mature sex gametes with only 23 instead of 46 chromosomes. The product of fertilization is a living human being with 46 chromosomes. Gametogenesis refers to the maturation of germ cells resulting in gametes. Fertilization refers to the initiation of a new human being.
1) Gametogenesis
As the human embryologist Larsen2 states it, gametogenesis is the process that converts primordial germ cells (primitive sex cells) into mature sex gametes — in the male (spermatozoa, or sperms), and in the female (definitive oocytes). The timing of gametogenesis is different in males and in females. The later stages of spermatogenesis in males occur at puberty, and continue throughout adult life. The process involves the production of spermatogonia from the primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary spermatocytes, and finally spermatids — or mature spermatozoa (sperms). These mature sperms will have only half of the number of their original chromosomes — i.e., the number of chromosomes has been cut from 46 to 23, and therefore they are ready to take part in fertilization.3
Oogenesis begins in the female during fetal life. The total number of primary oocytes — about 7 million — is produced in the female fetus' ovaries by 5 months of gestation in the mother's uterus. By birth, only about 700,000 - 2 million remain. By puberty, only about 400,000 remain. The process includes several stages of maturation — the production of oogonia from primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary oocytes, which become definitive oocytes only at puberty. This definitive oocyte is what is released each month during the female's menstrual period, but it still has 46 chromosomes. In fact, it does not reduce its number of chromosomes until and unless it is fertilized by the sperm, during which process the definitive oocyte becomes a secondary oocyte with only 23 chromosomes.4
This halving of the number of chromosomes in the oocytes takes place by the process known as meiosis. Many people confuse meiosis with a different process known as mitosis, but there is an important difference. Mitosis refers to the normal division of a somatic, or germ cell in order to increase the number of those cells during growth and development. The resulting cells contain the same number of chromosomes as the previous cells — in human beings, 46. Meiosis refers to the halving of the number of chromosomes that are normally present in a germ cell — the precursors of a sperm or a definitive oocyte — in order for fertilization to take place. The resulting cells have only half of the number of chromosomes as the previous cells — in human beings, 23.
One of the best and most technically accurate explanations for this critical process of gametogenesis is by Ronan O'Rahilly,5 the human embryologist who developed the classic Carnegie stages of human embryological development. He also sits on the international board of Nomina Embryologica (which determines the correct terminology to be used in human embryology textbooks internationally):
"Gametogenesis is the production of [gametes], i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. These cells are produced in the gonads, i.e., the testes and ovaries respectively. ... During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells (those with a double set of chromosomes, as found in somatic cells [46 chromosomes]) are termed primary, and haploid cells (those with a single set of chromosomes [23 chromosomes]) are called secondary. The reduction of chromosomal number ... from 46 (the diploid number or 2n) to 23 (the haploid number or n) is accomplished by a cellular division termed meiosis. ... Spermatogenesis, the production of spermatozoa, continues from immediately after puberty until old age. It takes place in the testis, which is also an endocrine gland, the interstitial cells of which secrete testosterone. Previous to puberty, spermatogonia in the simiferous tubules of the testis remain relatively inactive. After puberty, under stimulation from the interstitial cells, spermatogonia proliferate ... and some become primary spermatocytes. When these undergo their first maturation division (meiosis 1), they become secondary spermatocytes. The second maturation division (meiosis 2) results in spermatids, which become converted into spermatozoa."6
"Oogenesis is the production and maturation of oocytes, i.e., the female gametes derived from oogonia. Oogonia (derived from primordial germ cells) multiply by mitosis and become primary oocytes. The number of oogonia increases to nearly seven million by the middle of prenatal life, after which it diminishes to about two million at birth. From these, several thousand oocytes are derived, several hundred of which mature and are liberated (ovulated) during a reproductive period of some thirty years. Prophase of meiosis 1 begins during fetal life but ceases at the diplotene state, which persists during childhood. ... After puberty, meiosis 1 is resumed and a secondary oocyte ... is formed, together with polar body 1, which can be regarded as an oocyte having a reduced share of cytoplasm. The secondary oocyte is a female gamete in which the first meiotic division is completed and the second has begun. From oogonium to secondary oocyte takes from about 12 to 50 years to be completed. Meiosis 2 is terminated after rupture of the follicle (ovulation) but only if a spermatozoon penetrates. ... The term 'ovum' implies that polar body 2 has been given off, which event is usually delayed until the oocyte has been penetrated by a spermatozoon (i.e., has been fertilized). Hence a human ovum does not [really] exist. Moreover the term has been used for such disparate structures as an oocyte and a three-week embryo, and therefore should be discarded, as a fortiori should 'egg'."7 (Emphasis added.)
Thus, for fertilization to be accomplished, a mature sperm and a mature human oocyte are needed. Before fertilization,8 each has only 23 chromosomes. They each possess "human life," since they are parts of a living human being; but they are not each whole living human beings themselves. They each have only 23 chromosomes, not 46 chromosomes — the number of chromosomes necessary and characteristic for a single individual member of the human species. Furthermore, a sperm can produce only "sperm" proteins and enzymes; an oocyte can produce only "oocyte" proteins and enzymes; neither alone is or can produce a human being with 46 chromosomes.
Also, note O'Rahilly's statement that the use of terms such as "ovum" and "egg" — which would include the term "fertilized egg" — is scientifically incorrect, has no objective correlate in reality, and is therefore very misleading — especially in these present discussions. Thus these terms themselves would qualify as "scientific" myths. The commonly used term, "fertilized egg," is especially very misleading, since there is really no longer an egg (or oocyte) once fertilization has begun. What is being called a "fertilized egg" is not an egg of any sort; it is a human being.
2) Fertilization
Now that we have looked at the formation of the mature haploid sex gametes, the next important process to consider is fertilization. O'Rahilly defines fertilization as:
"... the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments, and ends with the intermingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes at metaphase of the first mitotic division of the zygote. The zygote is characteristic of the last phase of fertilization and is identified by the first cleavage spindle. It is a unicellular embryo."9 (Emphasis added.)
The fusion of the sperm (with 23 chromosomes) and the oocyte (with 23 chromosomes) at fertilization results in a live human being, a single-cell human zygote, with 46 chromosomes — the number of chromosomes characteristic of an individual member of the human species. Quoting Moore:
"Zygote: This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo). The expression fertilized ovum refers to a secondary oocyte that is impregnated by a sperm; when fertilization is complete, the oocyte becomes a zygote."10 (Emphasis added.)
This new single-cell human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes11 (not carrot or frog enzymes and proteins), and genetically directs his/her own growth and development. (In fact, this genetic growth and development has been proven not to be directed by the mother.)12 Finally, this new human being — the single-cell human zygote — is biologically an individual, a living organism — an individual member of the human species. Quoting Larsen:
"... [W]e begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual."13 (Emphasis added.)
In sum, a human sperm and a human oocyte are products of gametogenesis — each has only 23 chromosomes. They each have only half of the required number of chromosomes for a human being. They cannot singly develop further into human beings. They produce only "gamete" proteins and enzymes. They do not direct their own growth and development. And they are not individuals, i.e., members of the human species. They are only parts — each one a part of a human being. On the other hand, a human being is the immediate product of fertilization. As such he/she is a single-cell embryonic zygote, an organism with 46 chromosomes, the number required of a member of the human species. This human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes, directs his/her own further growth and development as human, and is a new, genetically unique, newly existing, live human individual.
After fertilization the single-cell human embryo doesn't become another kind of thing. It simply divides and grows bigger and bigger, developing through several stages as an embryo over an 8-week period. Several of these developmental stages of the growing embryo are given special names, e.g., a morula (about 4 days), a blastocyst (5-7 days), a bilaminar (two layer) embryo (during the second week), and a trilaminar (3-layer) embryo (during the third week).14
Since you cannot prove scientifically that mosquitos have no souls, why not "err on the side of caution" and assume that they do? This is essentially the argument that animal rights activists make.
I think that sounds like a person to me, you want to kill him.
I didn't say anything about wanting to kill fetuses or mosquitos. Once again you're letting your emotions obstruct your thought processes.
Lets not forget that the LAW considers a Fetus of any stage a “person”.
Not American law, under which only viable fetuses which would have been born but for the negligence in question are considered persons within the meaning of wrongful death statutes.
...[sperm and egg cell has a right to life regardless of the fact that they are dependent on people to bring them together and perpetuate the existence of their DNA] When the Sperm and Egg have combined...
You have failed to justify your assumption that sperm and egg cells have no "right to life" before they get together but do thereafter.
Please provide the evidence [that there is some scientific evidence which suggests that a "soul" is implanted in fetuses shortly before birth].
Studies have found that small children can recite knowledge (i.e. memories) which would only be known by a person who died while the child was in the womb shortly before birth, which suggests that people have reincarnated souls. Proof for the existence of souls is also suggested by research showing that there is a certain predictable small loss of weight (about 1/2 ounce) at the time of death.
Whether or not a “soul” resides (which you cannot prove) it is Human Life – a person.
That is an unproven philosophical assumption on your part, and once again you have failed to exclude a sperm cell (which is independent human life) from your definition of person.
You separation of Human and Person are a very scary[sic], does the “soul” reside in a person in a vegetative state?
There is no way to prove that to be the case, but keep in mind that people in comas have awakened and resumed normal mental functions, which suggests that their soul never left. What definitely distinguishes the comatose from fetuses, thoguh, is the ability to make known preferences about when to pull the plug in the event of the loss of faculties.
If there is no “soul” is it ok to snuff out a life?
Not necessarily. For example, it is not OK for you to force a woman to have an abortion because the fetus belongs to her, not you. It is not OK to kill your neighbor's geraniums either even though they have no "right to life".
Please prove [that human life does not begin at conception, which is merely one stage in the uninterrupted continuum of human life] and give us the exact moment Human Life does begin.
Human life began thousands of years ago and has been a continuum ever since. If you do not accept that as having been proved then you really are out there in deep fantasyland.
You still haven't explained why you would assume fertilized eggs have a right to life but unfertilized eggs and sperm cells do not. By your analysis, a fertilized egg which will later produce identical twins has less of a right to life than a non-twin. (Keep in mind that when a fertilized egg divides into two identical twins, the single zygote "ceases to exist" as such and two "new human being(s are) produced".)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/568100/posts">
Try actually reading the information. Some one's been kind enough to print some of Dr. Irving's information on this thread, already.
The reference *does* explain the difference betwee the gametes and the zygote: the zygote is a single, complete human being.
He may be able to divide to form two or even three single human beings, but, at that time, he is a human being (With more "potential" :) than he has later, perhaps.)
When we die, we "cease to exist" but that does not negate our our right to live while we are alive.
However, the zygote does not cease to exist: he simply changes. If you are cloned by some future technology, or (God forbid) you have an arm or leg amputated, you will still be the same human being you were at fertilization, with the added patina of life experiences and change.
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.