Life begins when you realize that some people aren't work the effort of typing a response.
When does life begin?
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
Life begins when you realize that some people aren't work the effort of typing a response.
Life began a billion years ago. Humans have been around about a million. Why is human life more sacred than any other. What I read here is a bunch of egos with strong personal opinions about the "special"ness of human life. Really folks, what difference does killing a few few fetus' make when we are killing the freakin' planet and thus all life on it? Just saying, we need a little perspective here..
So, your argument is that since life isn't perfect, nothing should matter? If you don't respect all, you may as well respect nothing?
BTW in modern science viruses are in a somewhat gray area between living and nonliving.
Sаbine;1281566 said:
Fair enough. You said they aren't exactly living things, as part of something complicated relating to when life begins. Saying "not exactly" to me is an implication that it is somewhere between alive and not alive.
So I'll ask it in a different manner. How is this complicated?
I don't believe anyone's born a sinner. So that makes me a certified sane
I am not sure that Christians believe that everybody is born a sinner. Thus, if a newborn or an infant dies (without an opportunity of giving his life to Christ), most Christians will say that he went to Heaven, not to Hell.
Quite the opposite. Life is sacred. None of it can exist without all the rest. We are but one small part of the web of life. What I see here is the argument that humans are some how more special but we are not. We argue about the rights of a fetus and at the same time have no regard for the living (war, genocide, etc.) or the life support system that sustains us (the environment). The abortion issue is a highly emotionally charged one that does not take all the other atrocities into consideration. It defies logic to be so highly focused on a microcosmic issue.
While I get what you mean on a broad level, I have plenty of regard for all those issues, and won't stop having an opinion on one just because other issues exist.
I don't think human life is more sacred than any other, Cliffy. That is a religious views (and ranks along with the superstition that life begins at conception).
However, we belong to a biological species, and as such, we are bound to value human life more than any other life. That is the instinct of survival, which is hard wired into every species.
Or you may respect everything equally.
Sacredness is not just a religious sentiment. It has more to do with respect and an awareness of our connection to all life. I have no more use for religion than you do, but that does not preclude my honouring the life force in all things.
Re: "not exactly" see my post # 86
Viruses are genetic parasites. They have to enter a host cell and insert their genome into host DNA in order to replicate and multiply. Viruses don't have cell organization that would let them to actually live on their own - there's no organelles, no nutrients, no cytoplasm, just tightly packed DNA or RNA in a capsid.
ya that's fine but you can't go around saying, END OF STORY.
you're not supreme ruler here, it's not what you say goes!
we all have a right to our opinions and nobody is necessarily wrong.
Because viruses aren't exactly living things! :iconbiggrin: They use living things to produce somewhat non-living! They don't have the process of actual life to start with.
If there's no cellular structure, there's no metabolism by default.
An admirable sentiment. However, as a biological species, we are bound to honour human life more than any other life. Not to do so would go against the biological imperative, in this case, the survival instinct.
Sаbine;1281595 said:
:lol: So where does the complication enter the picture? They aren't living things.
Metabolism is partly chemical pathways. I mention metabolism because if something had biochemical pathways without a cellular structure, then I would agree that this complicates matters. But where a virus has none of either, I fail to see how it complicates a discussion about when life begins.
My point is that unless we honour and take care of all life, we will not survive. It is in our best interests to be responsible stewards of the Earth. Our neglect has extincted many species and threatened many others. When we go the way of the dinosaurs, abortion will have been a mute point.
Again, I agree. And if we go the way of dinosaurs, abortion won’t be to blame, earth is overpopulated as it is. Besides, I am not sure we will last as long as dinosaurs anyway. They lasted more than 150 million years, we may be lucky to survive a tenth as long as that.