Does life begins at conception?

[CharlesDarwin]

Bravo! Was that hard? YOu actually made a decision base on YOUR criteria, science supplying the data. I make my decion based on science also, MY criteria is different. Either way, both are OPINIONS, but one is more accepted thus the law.

Legally, I agree. Decision on abortion is the sole right of the mother, except in extenduating circumstances. Science could actually help with late term abortions by keeping the baby alive and available for adoption or the father (who has no decision in the matter)

I never said anything i havent said this entire thread, if you wanted to know when beta waves are detected you could have searched or asked me to inform you alot sooner had you asked what you wanted to know.

except your criteria is **** and results in all sorts of problems…

1. All cells have unique DNA, even in your own body cells do not have the same DNA. infact by the time you are 70 it is estimated less than 5% of the cells in your body have the same DNA you had at birth.
2. Identical twins have the same DNA but are not the same person. if you wish to argue this point that DNA determines personhood then you must explain this and also answer why a person who murders identical twins is charged with two murders when only one unique set of DNA was “killed”(used because the DNA is not killed but you should see what i mean)
3. some people have more than one unique set of DNA in one body, its called chimerism and results in people having what is essentially when two zygotes form one and one zygote forms say the top half of the body and the other forms the bottom half…or one forms all but the left leg etc it comes in many levels but none the less one complete body has two sets of unique DNA…so is this body two people? if so should a person who murders a chimera be charged with two murders?

 

[CharlesDarwin]

point of order (yet again): we are only talking about the cells that become the fetus when the egg & sperm are united. All other references to cheek cells, spit, etc. is just static and distracting. I stay on point on this subject.

but what is the structural difference between them? what is the quantifiable objective difference?

 

[CharlesDarwin]

see my above post.
A better question for Catholics is: “When does a fetus have a soul”?

but since you can’t prove a soul even exists let alone when it enters the fetus…you can not make laws based on your opinion

 

[NE_Catholic]

I never said anything i havent said this entire thread, if you wanted to know when beta waves are detected you could have searched or asked me to inform you alot sooner had you asked what you wanted to know.

except your criteria is **** and results in all sorts of problems…

1. All cells have unique DNA, even in your own body cells do not have the same DNA. infact by the time you are 70 it is estimated less than 5% of the cells in your body have the same DNA you had at birth.
2. Identical twins have the same DNA but are not the same person. if you wish to argue this point that DNA determines personhood then you must explain this and also answer why a person who murders identical twins is charged with two murders when only one unique set of DNA was “killed”(used because the DNA is not killed but you should see what i mean)
3. some people have more than one unique set of DNA in one body, its called chimerism and results in people having what is essentially when two zygotes form one and one zygote forms say the top half of the body and the other forms the bottom half…or one forms all but the left leg etc it comes in many levels but none the less one complete body has two sets of unique DNA…so is this body two people? if so should a person who murders a chimera be charged with two murders?

This is all just “static” to me. I gave you my opinion, it is scientifically sound.

 

[CharlesDarwin]

This is all just “static” to me. I gave you my opinion, it is scientifically sound.

but these are legal questions that will arise if your opinion were put into law so you NEED to answer them if you want abortion to be outlawed on the basis of DNA

 

[NE_Catholic]

but since you can’t prove a soul even exists let alone when it enters the fetus…you can not make laws based on your opinion

What is you problem? Have I ONCE mentioned giving laws or rights to unborn children? This was a question about Catholic faith, not secular law. If you want to promote atheism, start a thread about and go at it. This is a CATHOLIC web site and will have CATHOLIC questions.

 

[NE_Catholic]

but these are legal questions that will arise if your opinion were put into law so you NEED to answer them if you want abortion to be outlawed on the basis of DNA

???
Where in this thread do I mention outlawing abortion?
Are you that bent on attacking Catholics that you must bring extrenious matters to arguements?
Start or join a thread about outlawing abortion.

 

[CharlesDarwin]

???
Where in this thread do I mention outlawing abortion?
Are you that bent on attacking Catholics that you must bring extrenious matters to arguements?
Start or join a thread about outlawing abortion.

so you don’t vote for laws because of your opinion? you don’t think you vote for candidates because they share your opinion?

even if you don’t i guarentee other people do.

 

[NE_Catholic]

so you don’t vote for laws because of your opinion? you don’t think you vote for candidates because they share your opinion?

even if you don’t i guarentee other people do.

there you go again.
go start a thread about it.

this section of threads is “moral theology”. Why are you here? There are other sections where you can post your views.

 

[CharlesDarwin]

there you go again.
go start a thread about it.

this section of threads is “moral theology”. Why are you here? There are other sections where you can post your views.

well I am glad you dont vote based on your opinions.
either way, I would like to see your answers to that question. I think you dont want to though because you can’t answer them w/o making your position crumble

 

[NE_Catholic]

well I am glad you dont vote based on your opinions.
either way, I would like to see your answers to that question. I think you dont want to though because you can’t answer them w/o making your position crumble

you are a terrible troll. I suggest CL or AOL, people are more inclined to take the bait there. I’m just kinda sad CAF doesn’t have a reporting mechanism for posters like you. God Bless.

 

[CharlesDarwin]

you are a terrible troll. I suggest CL or AOL, people are more inclined to take the bait there. I’m just kinda sad CAF doesn’t have a reporting mechanism for posters like you. God Bless.

LOL…I ask you questions…you ask me questions…i answer your questions…you refuse to answer mine…and IM the troll…Riiiiiiigt…

 

[antroji]

This is an interesting question, probably worthy of its own thread. There’s two points to address:

1. When do we consider an entity a person?
   By 8 months, the child is already conscious, it can suck its thumb and enjoy music. You’ll note that this is entirely consistent with what myself and many others were saying, that personhood depends on the mind, and that there is no specific point at which you can say something becomes a person.

If by the time your situation happens, the child is developed enough that we consider it a person, then clearly it would be murder in both cases.

1. But what about the case where the fetus is not developed to the point where we consider it a person? In this case, the abortion would not be murder since it does not kill a person. But somehow it seems very wrong for someone to forcefully kill the fetus against the woman’s consent. It would clearly be assault&battery, but would it also be murder? It would seem like it should be about as serious, yet it cannot be called murder without also making the abortion murder. Perhaps it is granted “honorary personhood” by virtue of the mother intending to carry it to term? After all, she might already have named it, bought clothes for it, even made long-term plans for it’s education, etc., as well as would probably have given it a funeral if it died.

This is worthy of some refinement:

When do we consider an entity a person?

This question is intimately involved with the issue of differentiating Consciousness per se, and awareness and its distinct stages as outlined in #85 above. Regarding that, and knowing that “irritation” in its biological science meaning, is a property of any life form, how significant is it that there is physiomotor activity? is that a reaction or a response?

… In this case, the abortion would not be murder since it does not kill a person. But somehow it seems very wrong for someone to forcefully kill the fetus against the woman’s consent.

Factors that might bear on this might be intent and responsibility. Those can happen at three levels: the woman, her immediate circumstances, and society in general. So what is the woman;s intent? Is she wanting, willing, able and competent to be a parent? These days we seem to broadly assume that biological ability already includes parental competence.Does it? should it? If not, what constitutes competence? Ability? Knowing someone who is in child development, without thinking aobut it much it is pretty clear to me that I was, ans most people are, woefully ignorant of pre-natal, post partum, infant, and early childfood development factors from chemistry of bonding to developmental factors including diet and environment, not to mention psychoemotional state of parent(s).

Regarding infants, a society in some rare circumstances may not be able to sustain an individual that is clearly unable to contribute and will be in some ways a liability. Our culture has that luxury, though it is yet carried our in a somewhat uncivilized way from the dimension of government.

1. And the idea of “honorary personhood” is fascinating. Good one! But legally, might it not come down to a matter of rights, concerns, or endangerment by virtue of physical symbiosis, or less likely, appurtenant property?

 

[po18guy]

Not quite, though in practice that is how it is done. There’s no reason it can’t be done by cloning (though there are some problems with that), in the near future it will also be possible to create egg cells from adult cells (we can already make sperm from stem cells).

Not quite? Do you have a scientifically supported alternative explanation? What a dichotomy! While science is bemoaning the “unsustainable” birth rate on earth, it is also rushing headlong into cloning. For what purpose? Superior humans? A master race? If you ever pray, pray that this does not occur, as both you and I will be eliminated from their world as “deficient”.

 

[sinnerdexter]

Not quite? Do you have a scientifically supported alternative explanation? What a dichotomy! While science is bemoaning the “unsustainable” birth rate on earth, it is also rushing headlong into cloning. For what purpose? Superior humans? A master race? If you ever pray, pray that this does not occur, as both you and I will be eliminated from their world as “deficient”.

Well for what purpose is not really relevant. What we’re saying is we would consider clones people too, and it is good to see you acknowledge that fact. But clones are not made via fertilization of an egg, so then fertilization is not equivalent to person.

 

[sinnerdexter]

This is worthy of some refinement:

1. This question is intimately involved with the issue of differentiating Consciousness per se, and awareness and its distinct stages as outlined in #85 above. Regarding that, and knowing that “irritation” in its biological science meaning, is a property of any life form, how significant is it that there is physiomotor activity? is that a reaction or a response?

Please do realize that we’re all in agreement that a fertilized egg is alive, and furthermore most of us would say the same thing of the egg and sperm before that. Not everyone agrees about when it becomes a person. Lots of things are alive and not treated as a person, so the fact that something is alive isn’t really too significant.

1. Factors that might bear on this might be intent and responsibility. Those can happen at three levels: the woman, her immediate circumstances, and society in general. So what is the woman;s intent? Is she wanting, willing, able and competent to be a parent? These days we seem to broadly assume that biological ability already includes parental competence.Does it? should it? If not, what constitutes competence? Ability? Knowing someone who is in child development, without thinking aobut it much it is pretty clear to me that I was, ans most people are, woefully ignorant of pre-natal, post partum, infant, and early childfood development factors from chemistry of bonding to developmental factors including diet and environment, not to mention psychoemotional state of parent(s).

Regarding infants, a society in some rare circumstances may not be able to sustain an individual that is clearly unable to contribute and will be in some ways a liability. Our culture has that luxury, though it is yet carried our in a somewhat uncivilized way from the dimension of government.

Well, I don’t think parenting ability is a prerequisite to have a child, neither legally nor in practice. Definitely something to be encouraged though.

1. And the idea of “honorary personhood” is fascinating. Good one! But legally, might it not come down to a matter of rights, concerns, or endangerment by virtue of physical symbiosis, or less likely, appurtenant property?

I’m not sure. I just thought it up on the spot. An analogy might be pets. Some people treat their pet as a person, and some even ask that others do too. Pets can be companions, for example. And if someone kills someone’s pet, people get really upset, even when they wouldn’t normally get similarly upset when someone kills an animal, destroys property, or even kills a non-pet animal owned by someone. These pets are granted a privileged status due to the bond their owner has with them, but I’m not certain of the mechanism for this. In the same way, people get more upset when someone kills a primate than a lizard.

We don’t like people killing people, and we don’t like people killing even things that are slightly similar to people. (And for good reason). But while the other examples I mentioned can’t be granted “honorary person” status due to the impracticality of it, a fetus that the mother intends to carry to term certainly could. After all, quite a few people consider them people already.

 

[po18guy]

What is you problem? Have I ONCE mentioned giving laws or rights to unborn children? This was a question about Catholic faith, not secular law. If you want to promote atheism, start a thread about and go at it. This is a CATHOLIC web site and will have CATHOLIC questions.

Careful there! I was watching the slow but observable evolution from Darwinist to Christian.

 

[limabeanerson]

I have a difficult time with the idea that the starting point for human existence begins at the point that all of the information necessary for a fully formed person is gathered together. It seems if this concept worked for persons, then it should also work for other things.

For example, let’s say that my wife and I go into a closed room together and after a lot of activity, sweating and moaning, we emerge with a recipe for a cake. All of the information necessary to create that cake is contained in the recipe. But my wife is still going to add ingredients, in some particular order, passing various milestones, and then leave the properly assembled items in her oven at a certain termperature for a set period of time.

Now, it seems clear to me that we have a cake once it comes out of her oven, and probably at some time prior to that. But is it a cake when it still a recipe on a piece of paper?

Sorry if this point has already been made, i did not read every post yet…

Your example is flawed. Having a man and woman go into a room and write a recipe is not the same point as having a fertilized egg. The recipe would be (for Catholics) the marriage. Everything is in place to make the baby but the baby has not yet been made.

When you combine all the ingredients (eggs, flower, sugar, yeast) and place them in the oven that would be the analogy to a fertilized egg. At that point the cake has all that is needed to be a cake. If left alone it will grow into what we recognize as a cake.

When you combine all the required ingredients (sperm/egg) inside the woman you have all that is needed to be a baby. If left alone, baring any natural or un-natural problems, it will ALWAYS grow and develop and eventually be born.

Yes, with the cake there may be a power outage and the cake “dies” half way through cooking, or maybe the mother pulls it out of the oven before its ready and throws it in the trash. That does not change what it was/is. A cake.

 

[Newbie2]

Id be very interested to see your sources for this claim. but since I know you don’t have any…

You think that a newborn has the ability to recoginze that it is alive?

either way perhaps “realize i was alive” was a poor choice of words, but the point is a clump of cells is not sentient a baby and a close to full term fetus is as well

You should choose your words better “before you post or else you just end up seeming foolish.”

You have never met a baby with a functioning brain? really? did your mother have any children that lived?

COGNITIVE, not functioning. You know what I meant.

And my mother did miscarry. I’ll ignore your callous and juvenile remark.

since a sleeping person nor a person who is in even a coma let alone just anesthesia never loses low level beta waves…no they do not lose personhood.

Interesting that you use scientific methods to define personhood, when science is incapable of doing so.

you really should do some research about this topic before you post or else you just end up seeming foolish.

Haha. You got me there. Great zinger.

I can lop off 100% of your brain, leaving only the stem, and you would breath and have a heart beat. so is this person still alive?

Yes, this person is still alive.

because they are sentient, conscious beings? Beta waves define personhood, you have yet to provide any other means of measuring that quality that doesn’t fall apart in a few seconds.

And your means of measurement is arbitrary.

if you thought before posting this, it doesn’t show

Would you leave the insults out, please?

 

[brumano]

Suppose a woman who is pregnant maybe 8months 3rd trimester, walks into a bank. Bank gets held up by robbers who shoot the woman, she survives but the baby doesn’t. Robber Joe get charged with man slaughter etc…

Same woman, pregnant 3rd trimester, goes to an abortion clinic, and Joe performs the abortion killing the child, and is paid, and goes free.

is that okay?

No, it’s not okay, never has been, never will be no matter how many they ever kill or however many different lies they concoct in order that they may continue to kill. The death toll continues to climb minute by minute.