Is a fetus a Human being?

[SirJosephPorter]

This is plain wrong. No matter how many times you say it, it's still a human being. It is not anything else but a human being. If it is miscarried, then it is a dead human being.

That is a religious opinion, Tonington, not a scientific one.

And an infant doesn't resemble an adult. So what?

So this. Fetus at conception no way resembles a human being, so the starting point has to be that it is not one. Those who claim that it is a human being, they must prove that to be the case.

And since there isn’t a scientific consensus saying that it is a human being, the case is not proved, in my opinion.

It's a human being from the moment the DNA in the egg and sperm join. After that, it's all biochemistry,

It is not a human being, it is a product of conception. And biochemistry is very important. If the fetus at conception must go through a lot of biochemical changes, must go through many transformations before it is born, then it is not a human being at conception.

I don't know if you're a human being, but I can only assume. A piece of paper doesn't make you a human being. Your DNA does.

Again, DNA does not make a human being. A human being has a unique DNA, big difference. A dead body has DNA, a severed arm has DNA. Human being defines the DNA, but other way is not true.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

In the embryonic stage when the baby has implanted into the womb is when the baby develops its organs and the like. That is up to about 8 weeks.
Bu mid pregnancy, a baby has ALL 5 senses working even.

That does not make it a human being, Anna.

 

[AnnaG]

Then no-one is human. I SAID THE SUM OF WHAT MAKES HUMANS IS WHAT MAKES A HUMAN! GET IT? I will not discuss this any more with you.

bye

 

[Tonington]

That is a religious opinion, Tonington, not a scientific one.

Nope. Molecular genetics, biochemistry, physiology, all confirm that it is a human being.

So this. Fetus at conception no way resembles a human being, so the starting point has to be that it is not one. Those who claim that it is a human being, they must prove that to be the case.

That is a non-sequitur. Of course it resembles a human being. It resembles a human fetus. A human being can be a zygote, an embryo, a fetus, an infant, a toddler, a teenager, an adult, a senior citizen, etc. All have their own characteristics, and none of them resemble the other stages of human life.

DNA for the last time, proves it is a human being. You've said that DNA can be taken from a dead human too. Well nobody is disputing that, and we can easily determine if the human is alive or dead.

It is not a human being, it is a product of conception. And biochemistry is very important. If the fetus at conception must go through a lot of biochemical changes, must go through many transformations before it is born, then it is not a human being at conception.

You don't know what you're talking about. Going by this guiding gem, a menopausal woman is no longer a human being, or conversely the pre-menopausal woman is not really a human yet. Or the teenager...

Biochemistry changes don't disqualify it. You've earned this one:

Again, DNA does not make a human being.

Of course it does. The DNA all humans carry contains the blue prints to form the human body, at all stages of life. The nucleic acids transmit the information needed to control complex chemical pathways to build a human.

A human being has a unique DNA, big difference. A dead body has DNA, a severed arm has DNA.

Yes, well nobody is arguing that a human is DNA. They're arguing that DNA is required for life, and it tells us what the organism is. A human.

 

[gerryh]

Then no-one is human. I SAID THE SUM OF WHAT MAKES HUMANS IS WHAT MAKES A HUMAN! GET IT? I will not discuss this any more with you.

bye

tried ta give ya a green...but it says I gotta spread it around more...so this will have to do....along with the comment...... That didn't take you very long...lol

 

[Francis2004]

In the embryonic stage when the baby has implanted into the womb is when the baby develops its organs and the like. That is up to about 8 weeks.
Bu mid pregnancy, a baby has ALL 5 senses working even.

My point is when do we consider a embryo or fetus a human ? When the sperm hits the egg or when it has appendages and what determines that a fertilized egg doesn't already have those ?

Also the issue again is still whether you ban it 100% or not and with Abortion its an all or nothing situation.. As in my case where I believe that 99% of the time a pregnancy should occur, if abortion is banned, I believe those few required will then be blocked..

 

[Francis2004]

OK that's it for me.. I'm outta here.. Good discussing the points with you all. I can see some are getting a little to :angryfire: so time for me to :arrow: and get some rest and get away from my :computer: to be with my son.. :lol::lol::lol:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Nope. Molecular genetics, biochemistry, physiology, all confirm that it is a human being.

Nothing of the sort, Tonington, that is a religious view. The day AMA, CMA, CMAJ, JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, Nature etc. tell me that fetus is a human being from conception, then I will consider it a scientific view.

That is a non-sequitur. Of course it resembles a human being. It resembles a human fetus.

Fetus at conception in no way resembles a human being, Tonington.

All have their own characteristics, and none of them resemble the other stages of human life.

Sure they have their own characteristic, fetus has totally different characteristics form a human being.

DNA for the last time, proves it is a human being. You've said that DNA can be taken from a dead human too. Well nobody is disputing that, and we can easily determine if the human is alive or dead.

DNA proves nothing of the sort. Just because something has human DNA, doesn’t mean that it is human. As I said before, a dead body, a severed hand, a cancer tumour have human DNA. That doesn’t mean they are human.

Going by this guiding gem, a menopausal woman is no longer a human being, or conversely the pre-menopausal woman is not really a human yet. Or the teenager...

It doesn’t work that way, Tonignton. Society has agreed that after birth it is a human being without exceptions. So the question f menopausal woman or teenager doesn’t arise.

Of course it does. The DNA all humans carry contains the blue prints to form the human body, at all stages of life. The nucleic acids transmit the information needed to control complex chemical pathways to build a human.

Sure, but because something has human DNA, that doesn’t make it a human being, I gave the examples earlier (Dead body, severed hand, cancer tumour).

Yes, well nobody is arguing that a human is DNA. They're arguing that DNA is required for life, and it tells us what the organism is. A human.

Again, that is where we have the disagreement. Human DNA is a manifestation of human being, DNA does not define a human being.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Then no-one is human. I SAID THE SUM OF WHAT MAKES HUMANS IS WHAT MAKES A HUMAN! GET IT? I will not discuss this any more with you.

bye

Quite so, Anna. We have discussed the subject to death in the other thread. We will simply be going over the same ground again here.

 

[Kreskin]

Why don't you people get it? I mean really. These arguments are laughable.

 

[gerryh]

Why don't you people get it? I mean really. These arguments are laughable.

Well, why don't you explain it....... and explain how these arguments are "laughable".

 

[Hazmart]

I wouldn't say that these arguments are laughable necessarily. It is a very serious topic but it is one of those issues that people just won't agree on.

I personally believe that a fetus is indeed a human, how could it not be. That doesn't, however, change my position on abortion.

 

[Cliffy]

Sooner or later, if we don't straighten it out, someone or something is going to do it for us, be it god, alien, galactic or the earth itself. We live in a finite system and are exceeding its capacity to sustain life. Soon this debate will become moot as the earth may just abort us.

 

[Kreskin]

I wouldn't say that these arguments are laughable necessarily. It is a very serious topic but it is one of those issues that people just won't agree on.

I personally believe that a fetus is indeed a human, how could it not be. That doesn't, however, change my position on abortion.

That's just it. Some people think the issue is about whether or not a fetus is human life. It has nothing to do with it at all. That's why it's laughable; the same old senseless debates keep rolling on. Obviously people don't understand the issue, and they have no intention of understanding it.

 

[Tonington]

Nothing of the sort, Tonington, that is a religious view. The day AMA, CMA, CMAJ, JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, Nature etc. tell me that fetus is a human being from conception, then I will consider it a scientific view.

That will never happen, because those organizations have better things to do. Whether or not you call it a human being, it is a living human. Simply post a reason, why it is not a living human that doesn't also disqualify any other stage of human existence.

Your reasons about this scientific consensus...it's also called the negative proof fallacy.

Fetus at conception in no way resembles a human being, Tonington.

So, tell me then. What does a human being resemble?

Sure they have their own characteristic, fetus has totally different characteristics form a human being.

What are the characteristics of a human being?

DNA proves nothing of the sort. Just because something has human DNA, doesn’t mean that it is human. As I said before, a dead body, a severed hand, a cancer tumour have human DNA. That doesn’t mean they are human.

Way to ignore the part about determining if it's living. A living fetus is not a dead body, is not a severed hand, and is not a cancerous growth. It is a living human.

Get your head out of your behind.

It doesn’t work that way, Tonignton. Society has agreed that after birth it is a human being without exceptions. So the question f menopausal woman or teenager doesn’t arise.

Stop changing goal posts. You said that a biochemical change means it can't be human. That is obviously false. A piece of paper is not what makes something a human being. That is ludicrous.

Sure, but because something has human DNA, that doesn’t make it a human being, I gave the examples earlier (Dead body, severed hand, cancer tumour).

All of which are not a living whole specimen, which a fetus is, and is carrying human DNA.

Again, that is where we have the disagreement. Human DNA is a manifestation of human being, DNA does not define a human being.

You are really out of your league here, and on this there is consensus. DNA is what directs the growth of a human. If you remove the DNA from an egg and sperm, and join them together, nothing happens. The DNA defines what happens. It defines the cleavage, the formation of germ layers, gastrulation, embryonic development, everything. Don't be so obtuse.

 

[Hazmart]

That's just it. Some people think the issue is about whether or not a fetus is human life. It has nothing to do with it at all. That's why it's laughable; the same old senseless debates keep rolling on. Obviously people don't understand the issue, and they have no intention of understanding it.

I get you now. Yes, I agree. Same old debates going around and around.

 

[Ron in Regina]

????????????????8O

 

[gerryh]

I wouldn't say that these arguments are laughable necessarily. It is a very serious topic but it is one of those issues that people just won't agree on.

I personally believe that a fetus is indeed a human, how could it not be. That doesn't, however, change my position on abortion.

That's just it. Some people think the issue is about whether or not a fetus is human life. It has nothing to do with it at all. That's why it's laughable; the same old senseless debates keep rolling on. Obviously people don't understand the issue, and they have no intention of understanding it.

Ok, if the 2 of you agree that it is a living human being, how do you justify killing that human life?

 

[gerryh]

????????????????8O

No, we're not talking about beating a dead horse, we are talking about the justification of killing a human life.

 

[Hazmart]

No, we're not talking about beating a dead horse, we are talking about the justification of killing a human life.

No we are not, we are discussing whether a fetus is considered human...