T
well that depends. Are we talking about a human fetus? or a cow fetus? or a dog fetus or a dolphin fetus?I thought this should be an interesting thread. Basicly, is, or isn’t, a fetus a human?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/4dsonogram.jpg/120px-4dsonogram.jpg
An illegal alien? lol…could not resist. Yes, indeed it is a human being!well that depends. Are we talking about a human fetus? or a cow fetus? or a dog fetus or a dolphin fetus?
Fetus just describes the developmental stage of a mammal in utero, it’s not specific to humans only. But, I’m pretty sure a human fetus developing inside a human woman, that has come into existence by the fertilization of a human ovum by a human sperm, is indeed a unique individual of the human species. What else could it possibly be?
I don’t know. Some people must think it’s something else with all the pro-abortion threads lately.What else could it possibly be?
You are right, the Church’s position is based on the fact that the embryo and fetus are a new human being from the moment of conception. Ironically, it is the pro-choice side which often throws in the ensoulment argument to introduce doubt.I obviously voted human, but just to make this a little bit interesting, here goes. From a purely biological standpoint, there is no doubt, it is human. Science has taught us that conclusively. From a theological standpoint, it is not quite so clear. A human being is defined as body and soul, so the fetus becomes human at the time of ensoulment. Now, I think I am right, but willing to be corrected on this next point, the church does not definitively say when ensoulment occurs. Most theologians believe it is at the time of conception, but it is an open question in the church.
The church’s prohibition on abortion rests much more on the biological argument and the possibility of ensoulment.
Obviously, it’s a human being. The real question is, should it have any kind of human rights? We don’t give children the same rights that we give to adults, after all. Should fetuses have the same rights that children have? My vote is “Yes, they should.”I thought this should be an interesting thread. Basicly, is, or isn’t, a fetus a human?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/4dsonogram.jpg/120px-4dsonogram.jpg
With respect to the most basic right, ie the right to life, do we not give children the legal treatment as adults? Your vote is yes, that is good. But the issue of lesser rights for children can get you on a slippery slope when arguing with pro-abort folks. Many people justify abortion in their mind along this weird logic: as humans get younger, the rights afforded them become less and less, so abortion just falls on that path.Obviously, it’s a human being. The real question is, should it have any kind of human rights? We don’t give children the same rights that we give to adults, after all. Should fetuses have the same rights that children have? My vote is “Yes, they should.”![]()
***You tell me.I thought this should be an interesting thread. Basically, is, or isn’t, a fetus a human?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/4dsonogram.jpg/120px-4dsonogram.jpg
This is the point: the issue is not one of science since the scientific question is settled. What pro-abortion supporters have moved on to is the faux distinction between human and person. Since there can be no argument that even an embryo is human they challenge whether it is a person, which, since that is a word devoid of specific meaning, they can happily quibble about without risk of ever having to debate anything meaningful.I think almost every pro-abort agrees with … well… basic science that a human embryo or fetus is HUMAN. What they disagree with is that it’s a PERSON (with all the rights thereof).
Why am I suddenly envisioning separate bathrooms, and a fetus being granted 1/3 of a vote?This is the point: the issue is not one of science since the scientific question is settled. What pro-abortion supporters have moved on to is the faux distinction between human and person. Since there can be no argument that even an embryo is human they challenge whether it is a person, which, since that is a word devoid of specific meaning, they can happily quibble about without risk of ever having to debate anything meaningful.
Ender
Exactly. We already have extensive experience with the consequences of dividing the human race up into those who qualify for full human rights and those who don’t as (especially) blacks, Jews, indians, and orientals can testify. As horrific as were the consequences to those groups who’s humanness at one time or another was simply defined away, the greatest victims of the artificial distinction between fully human and something less is unquestionably that group of humans known as fetuses.Why am I suddenly envisioning separate bathrooms, and a fetus being granted 1/3 of a vote?![]()
Personhood is more of a legal construct, so it can serve as a moving goalpost, so to speak. They can freely admit that an embryo is human, but refuse to admit that a human in the embryonic stage of development merits the same consideration as a born infant.This is the point: the issue is not one of science since the scientific question is settled. What pro-abortion supporters have moved on to is the faux distinction between human and person. Since there can be no argument that even an embryo is human they challenge whether it is a person, which, since that is a word devoid of specific meaning, they can happily quibble about without risk of ever having to debate anything meaningful.
Ender