Emergence of humanity

[Ibby]

I'm against abortion, but for killing babies.

[9th Engineer]

It's not whether or not a zygot is a human or just tissue that's the really important issue here. The issue is when that person is concidered human enough to have rights. If a fetus is not human enough to have a right to life then it can also be bought and sold as a commodity, simple logic. You can take it further and say that even though you cannot experiment on humans without consent you can do so with a fetus. Go another step and laws against genetically modifying and cloning humans do not apply before it becomes human. There seems to be a misunderstanding about what is really upsetting people here, it's the issues down the road that are the big problem. And please don't say that even though a fetus isn't human we can be wishy-washy and pretend it is in some cases.

[Pangloss62]

...as it can think/survive outside the mother's body.

I think that would be around 6 or 7 years old. Humans, more than any other mammal, require years of protection and assistance before they can "survive" on their own.

That said, this is an issue because we humans still have sex for pleasure and bonding rather than for just procreation. It's all about technology, the technology that is used to do work for us (no more need for children for their labor) or that which is used to control (inhibit/encourage) our reproduction. We really need more research on male contraception. We men have trouble keeping our dicks in our pants and you women are always allowing them into your vaginas (except in the case of rape); yet the burden of the result (unwanted pregnancy) always seems to be carried by the woman. We all know how reason goes out the window in the throes of sexual passion, so a male contraceptive that would make sperm ineffective until the couple desires a baby would be a good solution; though I can hear Monty Python's "Every Sperm is Sacred" song playing in the background. Let's shift the burden for birth control to the men.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

It's not whether or not a zygot is a human or just tissue that's the really important issue here. The issue is when that person is concidered human enough to have rights. If a fetus is not human enough to have a right to life then it can also be bought and sold as a commodity, simple logic. You can take it further and say that even though you cannot experiment on humans without consent you can do so with a fetus. Go another step and laws against genetically modifying and cloning humans do not apply before it becomes human. There seems to be a misunderstanding about what is really upsetting people here, it's the issues down the road that are the big problem. And please don't say that even though a fetus isn't human we can be wishy-washy and pretend it is in some cases.

Valid points of possibilitys 9th Engineer.


The veto and issue I thought was from harvested eggs frozen and not fertilized ? Are they viable life? I don't think so. I think we can say the same for a chicken egg. We eat them because they are not fertilized. I don't think we would want to if even we suspected they were fertilized even if they looked the same. So do we have some inborn instinct that a fertilized egg is viable.?

[Pangloss62]

My brother used to have chickens. He served us fertilized eggs one morning and made a point of showing us said eggs before he scrambled them. You could see the sploogy mass of weirdness in the yolk I must admit, I felt a little weird when I saw it. Once they were scrambled, they tasted like any other eggs.

[Griff]

We've got one egg customer who only wants fertilized eggs. mmmm.. tastes like chicken.

[Stormieweather]

Having experienced the end of pregnancy in all of its forms (except partial birth abortion), as well as having been adopted, I have some thoughts on the matter. If the fetus could survive outside the womb (even if it is as early as 21 weeks) then I believe it is a human being. If the mother could potentially walk away (ie: give birth without the baby dying), then that fetus has become a 'baby', a person.

If you were of the opinion that the fetus was a human being prior to that point..at what stage would this determination no longer be applicable? Could it even be stretched to include unfertilized eggs and sperm? Because they have the 'potential' to become human beings, just as the unviable fetus does. The concept could reach ridiculous proportions.

I don't think there is a scientific way to decide this, it is an emotional, and sometimes religious, determination. If it feels wrong for you, then it is wrong.

I am eternally grateful for my three children as well as the fact that my birth mother chose not to abort me. I am also very grateful that I had choices available to me when I (stupidly) got pregnant as a very young woman. Having a baby while working full time to put myself through college (full time at night) with no family or support would have been disastrous for both me and the baby. Many years later, when I became pregnant while single, I had the resources and strength to have and to keep the baby (my oldest son) on my own. I do not regret my choices.

I am in favor of stem cell research. The embryos being used will either be frozen indefinately or be destroyed one way or another. The form of destruction will be either human or equipment error, or intentionally once they are no longer needed for their donor's pregnancy attempts.

Other clinics simply discard or destroy the spare embryos. Some embryos are simply flushed down a sink drain. Some are transferred to a medical waste bin where they are later incinerated. Some simply expose the embryos to the air and let them die; this normally takes four days or less.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem2.htm

If using the stem cells from an embryo that is less than 14 days old is such an issue, maybe all in vitro fertilization should be outlawed because this is the source of the embryos. 24+ eggs are extracted, fertilized and then 2-4 of them are implanted in the woman. The remainder? See above. So evidently it is ok to destroy these embryos as long as it is not in the course of scientific research? I do think that donor permission should be required as I would not want something that came from my body to be used for anything without my explicit knowledge and authorization.

Stormie

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

If you were of the opinion that the fetus was a human being prior to that point..at what stage would this determination no longer be applicable? Could it even be stretched to include unfertilized eggs and sperm? Because they have the 'potential' to become human beings, just as the unviable fetus does. The concept could reach ridiculous proportions.


~snip

I am in favor of stem cell research. The embryos being used will either be frozen indefinately or be destroyed one way or another. The form of destruction will be either human or equipment error, or intentionally once they are no longer needed for their donor's pregnancy attempts.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem2.htm

If using the stem cells from an embryo that is less than 14 days old is such an issue, maybe all in vitro fertilization should be outlawed because this is the source of the embryos. 24+ eggs are extracted, fertilized and then 2-4 of them are implanted in the woman. The remainder? See above. So evidently it is ok to destroy these embryos as long as it is not in the course of scientific research? I do think that donor permission should be required as I would not want something that came from my body to be used for anything without my explicit knowledge and authorization.

Stormie

exactly, well said.



p.s. I am glad your brith mom decided to keep you too. See there was a stormie in there!

[skysidhe]

chicken egg splooge = eww

[lumberjim]

human life never begins or ends. it just is.

if you wanted to have an abortion debate, why not just say so?

you say that the crux of the abortion debate is the rights of the fetus/child, as though it were a fact. Is it? What about the rights of the host/mother? Is the baby not a part of her until it is delivered? Should you be prevented from cutting off your little finger if you wanted to because it made some busy body queasy?

If we'd just stay out of each others business.......

[9th Engineer]

This was actually never intended to be an abortion debate. It's exactly what the title says, 'when does a human become human'. Once we had discussed that for a while it would probably turn to stem cells.

[9th Engineer]

btw, what the heck do you mean by "it never begins or ends".

[lumberjim]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

btw, what the heck do you mean by "it never begins or ends".

i mean that i believe that souls endure. the physical manifestation completes the person, but is not what gives one 'humanity'. I believe that i was 'human' long before i was born into this body, and will continue to be so long after i die. I've no idea when a soul first inhabits a physical body....could be before OR after or during birth. i just dont know. it doesn't really matter, i guess.

[tw]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

This was actually never intended to be an abortion debate. It's exactly what the title says, 'when does a human become human'. Once we had discussed that for a while it would probably turn to stem cells.

Are we confusing the issue - as if human were somehow something special. Human - a bag of water, some lumps of DNA, and clumps of mineral deposits - is the physical being. When is life called life? A completely different question from the humanity question. After all, some creatures only differ significantly from others due to higher intelligence. They are all biological matter. They all have life in various degrees. There is no magic criteria for life; no digital threshold. In occurs in various degrees from viruses to other higher forms.

We routinely kill zygotes, stem cells and other human cells. They are all human life - which religious extremists must deny to impose their beliefs on all others. The emotional want to impose their emotions on all others in the name of their religion. Religious concepts have no place in a logical discussion. Religious concepts are and should never be more than a relationship between you and your god. [big period] No religion or religious teachings should appear in this discussion. This discussion is about life - not religion nor personal biases.

As even the pagan gods intended, we are expected to make life and death decisions every day. The only thing that differentiates humans is higher cognizance levels. We make life and death decisions every day as we kill off our own tissues - even bleed - even kill other life forms such as bacteria. Even blood is human life. Zygote is life. Stem cells are biological life. And we make those life and death decisions daily - not some ficticious god.

Meanwhile that is completely different from cognizant existence. But again, not one religious bias or extremist rhetoric belongs in this thread. Intelligent life is considered superior to other life forms - a basis upon which some life forms murder or preserve life. Don't kill that insect! You will go to hell! Or instead we use logic and drive those silly religious beliefs from this discussion.

Biological life exists in so many forms. And then some lives have more right to live than others. We humans routinely murder life every day - as is required to survive and is defined by the real god - sometimes called nature. Get over and ignore those silly religious concepts as if a zygote was any more special than some other stem cell. It's a cell - nothing more. And like all other living cells, it has a unique purpose. Nothing more. Religious extremists don't like blunt logic which is why religious reasoning has no acceptable purpose in this thread.

Are you alive? Fine. That was nature as others routinely determine; who lives and who dies. Using contraception? Then you are killing life that god intended - if using pervert logic that some religions mislabel as facts. And yet that too has no relevance to the question of what is life.

The question posed is about reality - not about your relationship with your god. There is no digital threshold that defines life. Mankind even created life by mixing a soup of proteins and electrically sparking them. Where is god in all this? He does not exist. The experiment simply created another type of life. Nothing special. Just a lifeform with less intelligence. And still we chose which and when life will be murdered or survives. We start this decision by throwing away all religious biases and other similar emotions.

[bluecuracao]

Where is god in all this? He does not exist.

Perhaps God is the very thing that enables us do this stuff...you never know.