Life Begins At Conception

[Dirtebiker]

That door swings both ways, Chip.

You are desperately trying to equate the combination of human genetic material with the genesis of individual legal rights.

I am simply pointing out the obvious to you...by your definition a zygote may be "human", but so is a cancerous tumor.

Neither of those things has any legal right to exist simply based on the fact of their creation. Countless human eggs get fertilized but fail to yield developed human beings...untold billions of "humans" have been "created" but never progressed beyond a few foetal cells. Let's cut to the quick of your argument...did those zygotes, embryos, and foetus' all have full legal rights as men?

Your argument is ridiculous beyond words. There is no point to the "life begins at conception" argument beyond controlling women. Your argument is a pseudo-intellectual attempt to cover the fact that you want to use government force to coerce women to use their bodies against their own will...as forced incubators to host potential future human beings.

I must have missed where he said anything about abortion OR government!

 

[rvb]

This is interesting to watch, but it represents no new knowledge...it simply illustrates visually what has already been measured in the lab...a visually interesting chemical reaction to which some people will try to attach meaning.

Also, there is no "beginning" of life here. Life "began" eons ago. Both the egg and the sperm were "alive" before they came in contact with the other. Sexual reproduction is simply one mechanism by which life is propagated, one that ensures genetic diversity and fluidity.

So, what we see here is the beginning of a zygote...and without a consenting host within which it may attach and incubate, that is all it will ever be.

an acorn is not an oak tree, and a zygote is not a man.

I dont see moral or ethical implications here at all. I see chemistry, physics, and technology.

The new life IS created at this point... it is when the human being gets its genetic markers that will forever define it as an individual. A DNA test of the zygote would reveal it as a human being, and 100 years later in his/her coffin another DNA test will reveal it as the same person. Until sperm & egg join, that individual does not exist; that genetic marker exists no where else. it is the creation of a new living creature.

Birth is nothing special to this new human other than it's the first time they have to breath for themselves and put their digestive system to use.

From conception through life there are lots of "growth" milestones. First heartbeat in the womb seems to have lots of significance attached to it for some reason, but there are also other growth milestones in the individual's life, eg first tooth and change to adult teeth, puberty, grey hair, menopause for women, etc.

This is a cool article and cool science, to be able to see what is happening at that point, but I don't see how it could be considered earth-shattering that new life begins at conception.

-rvb

 

[PaulF]

Hmmm...I see. This isn't about abortion?

So you will have no issue if I change the thread title to something less drenched in anti-abortion rhetoric?

Something like "Scanning electron miscroscope captures electrical discharge at mammalian fertilization"...

...I mean, there is no other motive here, right?

 

[chipbennett]

Hmmm...I see. This isn't about abortion?

So you will have no issue if I change the thread title to something less drenched in anti-abortion rhetoric?

Something like "Scanning electron miscroscope captures electrical discharge at mammalian fertilization"...

...I mean, there is no other motive here, right?

It is obvious who has the agenda/motive here.

And I would have an inherent problem with a mod abusing his powers. Changing the thread of my title, for any reason other than some rules violation, simply because it offends your personal motive/agenda, would constitute such an abuse of power.

 

[yepthatsme]

Wow. This thread sure has taken a left turn.

I loved the article though. It was very interesting.


Time for some more

 

[T.Lex]

Wow. This thread sure has taken a left turn.

I loved the article though. It was very interesting.


Time for some more

Wait. If corn has the same nucleotides as humans, then according to some people, they might actually BE humans.

Does that make the INGO popcorn crew a bunch of cannibals?

 

[yepthatsme]

Wait. If corn has the same nucleotides as humans, then according to some people, they might actually BE humans.

Does that make the INGO popcorn crew a bunch of cannibals?

Thanks T.Lex. You have ruined popcorn for me.

 

[eldirector]

Well, corn and humans do share a large percentage of their DNA. Not just the bases, but actual genes. Judging by post quality around here, some maybe more, maybe less.

 

[two70]

That door swings both ways, Chip.

You are desperately trying to equate the combination of human genetic material with the genesis of individual legal rights.

I am simply pointing out the obvious to you...by your definition a zygote may be "human", but so is a cancerous tumor.

Neither of those things has any legal right to exist simply based on the fact of their creation. Countless human eggs get fertilized but fail to yield developed human beings...untold billions of "humans" have been "created" but never progressed beyond a few foetal cells. Let's cut to the quick of your argument...did those zygotes, embryos, and foetus' all have full legal rights as men?

Your argument is ridiculous beyond words. There is no point to the "life begins at conception" argument beyond controlling women. Your argument is a pseudo-intellectual attempt to cover the fact that you want to use government force to coerce women to use their bodies against their own will...as forced incubators to host potential future human beings.

That is a lovely combination of projection, ad hominem and circular logic but what does it have to do with the stated purpose of this thread?

 

[PaulF]

It is obvious who has the agenda/motive here.

And I would have an inherent problem with a mod abusing his powers. Changing the thread of my title, for any reason other than some rules violation, simply because it offends your personal motive/agenda, would constitute such an abuse of power.

Abuse of power? LOL.

Where do you think you are?

Chip, your agenda is as plain as day. Deflect all you will. If this was about science and wonder I would expect you to give the thread a title that reflects that fact, however...

"Life begins at conception" is an anti-abortion tag line. You have been trying to thread this pseudo-scientific point into your argument for quite a while here. You got called out on it...again.

A fertilized egg is not a man...it may not ever become a man. It does not deserve the same legal standing as a man (in my opinion, of course).

A sexually mature woman does has legal standing...she does get to decide what happens inside her body, even if that means removing a lump of tissue that may someday become a man.

If you want to talk about science, start a thread about science...not a thread about politics dressed up like science.

 

[chipbennett]

Abuse of power? LOL.

Where do you think you are?

Chip, your agenda is as plain as day. Deflect all you will. If this was about science and wonder I would expect you to give the thread a title that reflects that fact, however...

"Life begins at conception" is an anti-abortion tag line. You have been trying to thread this pseudo-scientific point into your argument for quite a while here. You got called out on it...again.

A fertilized egg is not a man...it may not ever become a man. It does not deserve the same legal standing as a man (in my opinion, of course).

A sexually mature woman does has legal standing...she does get to decide what happens inside her body, even if that means removing a lump of tissue that may someday become a man.

If you want to talk about science, start a thread about science...not a thread about politics dressed up like science.

I'll start whatever thread I want, with whatever title and content that I want, provided that it is within the stated site rules.

"Life begins at conception" is a scientifically factual statement, and the content of my OP clearly discussed a scientific observation.

 

[JettaKnight]

So if this thread goes off the rails and a Mod is involved does this mean another Mod has to closed the thread?

Why the purple? I would hope the answer is 'yes' for the sake of impartiality.

Can mods feel the smack of a banhammer?

 

[GregD]

Paul no matter what you believe or what I believe or what Chip believes, each should be treated with respect.

 

[T.Lex]

Thanks T.Lex. You have ruined popcorn for me.

I may have to change my sig line: Popcorn Denny.

 

[Rookie]

Paul no matter what you believe or what I believe or what Chip believes, each should be treated with respect.

QUOTED FOR TRUTH!

 

[Expat]

I may have to change my sig line: Popcorn Denny.

I like Cracker Jack better...

 

[GregD]

Thanks Rookie

 

[T.Lex]

I like Cracker Jack better...

Racist.

 

[JettaKnight]

Thanks T.Lex. You have ruined popcorn for me.

However, you made it more attractive me and my late friend Mr. Dahmer.

 

[HoughMade]

Racist.

he's just refusing to culturally appropriate. Kut, on the other hand, may not have any Cracker Jack.