Abortion: Biologically defining a human being?

[Contrabass101]

An atheist friend raised this question:

If human life is considered beginning at conception, because the cell then has the potential to become a child, why should not every single cell in our body be considered human life, since it is possible for them to become human beings as well, if given the right circumstances? My friend goes on and says, that the line between human and pre-human could logically be drawn at the time when the zygot becomes an embryon, that is when the cell is “fastened” in the womb. About 8 weeks into pregnancy.

This seems reasonable to me, but doesn’t Tradition and Church state, that life begins at conception? I’m not too sure about whether the Bible states it also.

Then again, is this considered a theological or a scientific question (because then Church and Tradition could be wrong)? Or is there a good reason why not every other cell is considered a human being, if life begins at conception?

• CB

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

Will a brain cell turn into a jet pilot? No. Will a zygote become an astronaut? Perhaps.

Does he not see the difference?

 

[Em_in_FL]

At the moment of conception… when an egg and sperm come together… a NEW and UNIQUE set of HUMAN DNA has been formed…
That DNA does not change throughout the entire life of that being… it’s the same at the moment of conception as it is 8 weeks into pregnancy as it is at 80 years of age…

Yes, a single human cell may fall away from the main being (ie, a flake of skin cells peeling off), but that single cell does not have the potential for future growth away from the main being…

The new and unique human being that is formed at the instant of conception has potential for future growth… and that tiny embryo is the entire main being for that unique set of DNA…

 

[1ke]

If human life is considered beginning at conception, because the cell then has the potential to become a child,

The cell does not have the “potential to become a child”, it is a child. It is a very small child, but it is 100% child. It has all of its DNA, different from it’s mother and father, unique, and growing rapidly.

why should not every single cell in our body be considered human life, since it is possible for them to become human beings as well, if given the right circumstances?

This is untrue.

My friend goes on and says, that the line between human and pre-human could logically be drawn at the time when the zygot becomes an embryon, that is when the cell is “fastened” in the womb. About 8 weeks into pregnancy.

Based on what “logic”? There is no difference between 1 day, 8 weeks, and 40 weeks other than time. The baby has grown from one cell to over a billion cells. That is what babies do, they grow. We continue to grow and change until the day we die. We are a continuum, and our *lives *begin when *we *begin-- at the point when our unique person is formed when egg and sperm unite-- and end when we die.

This is not “logical” at all. It is arbitrary and unscientific.

This seems reasonable to me, but doesn’t Tradition and Church state, that life begins at conception? I’m not too sure about whether the Bible states it also.

Or is there a good reason why not every other cell is considered a human being, if life begins at conception?

Why would you believe that a cell from your fingernail is a human being?

 

[gradstud35]

"This seems reasonable to me, but doesn’t Tradition and Church state, that life begins at conception? I’m not too sure about whether the Bible states it also"

The Bible doesn’t need to state it. It’s pretty clear from two different gospels that Christ’s human life on earth began with Mary’s conception of him, not his birth.

St. Joseph was a man of high honor and faith. He could have had Mary stoned for being pregnant while betrothed to her. If that had been the case, there would have been no birth of Jesus.

It’s not specifically addressed in the Bible because the Bible was written 2000 years ago, abortion is a modern holocaust awash in lies and propoganda as to what it really is. While there were certainly women in those days who tried to abort either through herbs or gruesome measures, it was recognized for what it was, murder.

 

[estesbob]

An atheist friend raised this question:

If human life is considered beginning at conception, because the cell then has the potential to become a child, why should not every single cell in our body be considered human life, since it is possible for them to become human beings as well, if given the right circumstances? My friend goes on and says, that the line between human and pre-human could logically be drawn at the time when the zygot becomes an embryon, that is when the cell is “fastened” in the womb. About 8 weeks into pregnancy.

• CB

It is not possible for every cell in our body to become human beings. Your friend is as weak on biology as he is fatih.

 

[Contrabass101]

Been picking an choosing from the posts above…

At the moment of conception… when an egg and sperm come together… a NEW and UNIQUE set of HUMAN DNA has been formed…

Yeah, but I don’t see how unique DNA constitutes a person. Doesn’t one-egged twins have the same DNA?

The cell does not have the “potential to become a child”, it is a child.

Notice that I did not say, that the cell has potential to “become a human being”. Child is a development state of the human person which IMO spans from birth to age 12-14.

The Bible doesn’t need to state it. It’s pretty clear from two different gospels that Christ’s human life on earth began with Mary’s conception of him, not his birth.

But what exactly is meant by “conception” in Scripture? Is it when the sperm and egg meet? When the fertilized egg fastens in the womb? We don’t know how exactly Christ was conceived, other than it was miraculous. Was it God creating a sperm? A zygote? An embryon?

That conception is defining the moment that the egg and sperm meet is only a resent understanding. NT writers knew next to nothing about the biology of birth.

It is not possible for every cell in our body to become human beings. Your friend is as weak on biology as he is fatih.

I’m not completely sure about that… he is a very learned person, and I don’t think he would make such an obvious blunder - i can ask him, though. Isn’t just that the point of stem cells, btw - you can get those from adults, too, right?

• CB

 

[Philothea53]

(From various references)

The developmental geneticist Jerome Lejeune (1926-1994), discoverer of the chromosomal basis for Down’s Syndrome, stated:

“…each of us has a unique beginning, the moment of conception … As soon as the 23 chromosomes carried by the sperm encounter the 23 chromosomes carried by the ovum, the whole information necessary and sufficient to spell out all the characteristics of the new being is gathered … a new human being is defined which has never occurred before and will never occur again … [it] is not just simply a non-descript cell, or a ‘population’ or loose ‘collection’ of cells, but a very specialized individual …” (10).

Dr. Kischer, emeritus professor of Anatomy at the University of Arizona, writes, “…the first thing learned in human embryology [is] that the life of the new individual human being begins at fertilization (conception)” (11). He continues, “we should respect a microscopic human embryo because at that time it is an integrated whole organism, just as the human is at every moment in time until death. Every human embryo deserves as much respect as you or I because it is formed as a new individual human life within the continuum of life …” To deny this, Kischer says, is “a trivialization and corruption of the science of human embryology.”

“The birth of a human life really occurs at the moment the mother’s egg cell is fertilized by one of the father’s sperm cells.” (Life Magazine, April 30, 1965).

It is a scientific fact that at the moment of conception a brand new human being begins. Although tiny, he or she is genetically distinct and separate from his or her mother.

On Day 1: Genetic make-up of the unborn child is already determined (e.g. sex, eye color, hair color, etc.). The only changes are in location. The fertilized egg now moves on through the fallopian tube and implants itself in the lining of the uterus, known as the endometrium (within first 7 days). All that is needed is time and nourishment.

There is no point from fertilization until death when, biologically, the human nature of that human being is altered. That human being continuously creates specifically human enzymes and, once formed, is on a path to grow and develop in the natural course of human growth. As we’ve said, all he or she needs is nutrition and a warm place to grow.

 

[Man]

Any cell that is a union of sperm and egg is a human life (definitely).

This is a weak arguement I have heard before, which ussually concludes that abortion is a “justifiable homocide” or that the killing is against one who cannot feel or understand pain (thus again justifiable homocide.

I don’t find it justifiable.

 

[Man]

And the second question is one asking why a cell is not considered a person is logically not feasible. There is no natural action which will cause my skin cells to become a person.

Likewise, abortion is unnatural.

 

[estesbob]

Been picking an choosing from the posts above…

Yeah, but I don’t see how unique DNA constitutes a person. Doesn’t one-egged twins have the same DNA?

Well of its not human life what is it?

Notice that I did not say, that the cell has potential to “become a human being”. Child is a development state of the human person which IMO spans from birth to age 12-14.

Agreed-and per the rationale of those who support abortion it ought to be able to kill the little buggers until they reach the age of 12.

But what exactly is meant by “conception” in Scripture? Is it when the sperm and egg meet? When the fertilized egg fastens in the womb? We don’t know how exactly Christ was conceived, other than it was miraculous. Was it God creating a sperm? A zygote? An embryon?

Science up until the 1950s always taught that conception occurred when the sperm fertilized the egg. There was a concentrated effort, led by the Pharmaceutical companies, to change the definition of conception to when the child implanted in the womb. The reason for this was not any new biological insight-it was because they had developed the IUD and didn’t want it banned as an abortificant,

As far as your other questions the are just plain silly

That conception is defining the moment that the egg and sperm meet is only a resent understanding. NT writers knew next to nothing about the biology of birth.

So? Conception is a biological event.

I’m not completely sure about that… he is a very learned person, and I don’t think he would make such an obvious blunder - i can ask him, though. Isn’t just that the point of stem cells, BTW - you can get those from adults, too, right?

• CB

I suspect he is you but he/you is dead wrong that any human cell can develop into a human being-that includes, BTW, stem cells

 

[vern_humphrey]

Been picking an choosing from the posts above…

Yeah, but I don’t see how unique DNA constitutes a person. Doesn’t one-egged twins have the same DNA?

Yes – but they do not have the mother’s DNA. That means they are separate beings, and not part of her body.

Notice that I did not say, that the cell has potential to “become a human being”. Child is a development state of the human person which IMO spans from birth to age 12-14.

A cell from your finger is from your finger. It is not a complete being in and of itself.

On the other hand, the one-celled being is complete in and of itself.

But what exactly is meant by “conception” in Scripture? Is it when the sperm and egg meet? When the fertilized egg fastens in the womb? We don’t know how exactly Christ was conceived, other than it was miraculous. Was it God creating a sperm? A zygote? An embryon?

The Bible was not meant to be a biology text (nor a physics text, a mathematics text, etc.) The biblical message is that we are to respect human life. Science tells us that begins when the DNA is formed.

That conception is defining the moment that the egg and sperm meet is only a resent understanding. NT writers knew next to nothing about the biology of birth.

The NT writers knew nothing at all about nuclear fission – that doesn’t mean the principles of morality they espoused don’t apply to nuclear war.

The biblical message is that we are to respect human life. Science tells us that begins when the DNA is formed.

I’m not completely sure about that… he is a very learned person, and I don’t think he would make such an obvious blunder - i can ask him, though. Isn’t just that the point of stem cells, btw - you can get those from adults, too, right?

• CB

Learned, but wrong. A cell from your finger is not a whole person, complete in itself. The unborn child at that state is a whole person, complete in itself.

 

[proudnifi]

Been picking an choosing from the posts above…

Yeah, but I don’t see how unique DNA constitutes a person. Doesn’t one-egged twins have the same DNA?
Perhaps you don’t need “unique” DNA to be a person - but surely each identical twin is a person?

Notice that I did not say, that the cell has potential to “become a human being”. Child is a development state of the human person which IMO spans from birth to age 12-14.
The idea being is that each embryo is already a human being, as opposed to having the potential to become a human being.

• CB

Also, there is a difference between stem cells and embryos.

 

[zzz]

Yes – but they do not have the mother’s DNA.

Sure they do…mitochondrial DNA.

 

[Neithan]

Easily answered: new life begins when a new organism is created.

So a zygote is a new life.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Sure they do…mitochondrial DNA.

Let’s try to avoid sophistry, shall we?

 

[zzz]

Let’s try to avoid sophistry, shall we?

Just keepin’ it real, Vern! (BTW, I’ve enjoyed reading your posts on the gun threads!)

 

[Em_in_FL]

Yeah, but I don’t see how unique DNA constitutes a person. Doesn’t one-egged twins have the same DNA?

You can look at any set of DNA and determine what life form it came from… plant, animal, fungi… and exactly what species… oak tree, giraffe, human being… DNA DOES define “humanity”…

But what exactly is meant by “conception” in Scripture? Is it when the sperm and egg meet? When the fertilized egg fastens in the womb? We don’t know how exactly Christ was conceived, other than it was miraculous. Was it God creating a sperm? A zygote? An embryon?

That conception is defining the moment that the egg and sperm meet is only a resent understanding. NT writers knew next to nothing about the biology of birth.

Scripture isn’t meant to define science… God created both, so they cannot contradict.

 

[edwest2]

Your friend began life as an embryo. We all did. That is the reason scientists consider the human embryo so important. If not, they could just grab a fingernail and tinker with that.

It’s very clear scientifically.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Delphinus85]

Actually life is defined as beginning at conception because it is a whole separate human being, with it’s own genes that are totally unique from both its parents. It’s gender, hair colour, and some personality traits have all already been decided at that point.