They are part of the woman because they are derived from her tissue, are present in her when she is born (I don’t know when they form during her fetal life - this is something I need to find out.) They are as much a part of her as a lung cell.
And they’re expelled from her during ovulation, thereby rendering them not part of her.
So you mean that they might not be needed to maintain the life of the fetus or embryo, but without them the fetus or embryo will die outside the womb? You have definitely gotten me confused about what you are trying to state here. The fetus or embryo won’t die from not getting them, but the baby will die from not getting them?
I mean that all the immediate needs of the embryo/fetus would be met, but at some point, the embryo or fetus will be expelled from the womb and will have to deal with a different environment. In the meantime, though, its material needs would have been met.
OK, say it doesn’t have a soul. So does this mean there is no afterlife for it? And if there is no afterlife, if the embryo/fetus if aborted, you are taking away the only life it has. That would be very sad.
Effectively, yes, it means there’s no afterlife for it (or for me, you, rocks, plants, etc., etc.).
And how sad it is depends on your point of view. I don’t personally think that aborting a fetus “takes away the only life” from a person any more than not agreeing to have an unprotected one-night stand does. In both cases, the person that might’ve resulted doesn’t materialize.
Yes, I am saying that. The egg is tissue derived from the woman, whether it will be fertilized or not. It is part of the woman. But if the egg is fertilized, it is immediately a separate human being and person and should have all the rights that all other persons have.
So… because the egg is tissue derived from the woman, it’s part of the woman.
A fertilized egg is tissue derived from the woman and the man; is it part of the woman and the man?
Can you prove to me that a fertilized ovum is not a person? If it is not a person, abort away. I wouldn’t care, except I personally think that life is precious - all life, not just human. But that is my own feeling.
Maybe. It depends on whether we can come to an agreement on what makes a person a person.
I didn’t decide ahead of time and then try to come up with a list of characteristics that are shared by embryos, feti, babies, etc. but not shared by anything else. Why, if we don’t know when a person becomes a person, do we take the chance of erring? When do you think a person becomes a person? At birth? If so, why? The only difference that I can see between a born baby and an unborn baby is one of stages. And that is from my study of biology. I do believe that a fertilized ovum is a person and has a soul. You say it doesn’t have a soul. Can you prove this? You are saying it is not a person. Can you prove this? No, you can’t, as I can’t prove that it is a person from a scientific standpoint. I can’t prove it and you can’t prove it because in science you can’t prove anything. You can only present evidence.
I have had rather militant vegetarians tell me that cows, pigs and even chickens are “persons”. Can you prove they’re not? If you can’t, are you a vegan?
If you want to drop the idea of a soul, fine. We will then debate simply on science. No religion, no philosophy. It doesn’t matter. A fertilized ovum is STILL a human being and it is still a person. Feti at younger and younger ages are being born early and being saved by medicine. Are these prematurely born babies persons? Of course. So go backward. If a fetus is a person, so is an embryo because the only difference between the two is an arbitrarily defined gestational age. So, an embryo is a person. Go back a bit more. If an embryo is a person, so is a fertilized egg. Why? Again, because the only difference is one of a stage of life. You do agree, don’t you, that a fertilized egg is alive? It certainly isn’t dead, although it may die well before birth. But then, we all die. A fertilized ovum, embryo, fetus, born baby, child, adult…they are stages of a human life that are defined by the characteristics of each stage. An adult differs from a child in the amount of brain tissue, the closure of the “soft spot” on the skull, etc. A child differs from a born baby in brain and other bodily development. Keep on going back and you will see that it goes back to the fertilized ovum which has all the components necessary to develop as a human being. As a person. I don’t understand why pro-aborts cannot see this!!
I agree that a fertilized egg is alive. However, I also recognize that an unfertilized egg is alive. We are all part of an uninterrupted chain of life that goes back for billions of years.
Whether you’re doing it intentionally or not, I think you’re playing a game of false equivocation. Try this as an analogy:
- the waters just east of Cape Horn are part of the Atlantic Ocean.
- the difference between the waters just east of Cape Horn and just west of Cape Horn is an arbitrary definition.
- similarily, difference between the waters just west of Cape Horn and those immediately northwest is also an arbitrary definiton.
- similarily, difference between these waters and those immediately northwest is also an arbitrary definiton.
- this can be repeated many times until you get to the waters around Hawaii.
- therefore, the waters around Hawaii are part of the Atlantic Ocean.
- therefore, Hawaii is in the Atlantic Ocean.
What’s wrong with this argument that isn’t wrong with yours?
