NATION

PASSWORD

Is a human being created at fertilization?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Is a human being created at fertilization?

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:43 am

The fundamental question associated with the abortion issue is whether or not the prenatal offspring's right to life and to care from his or her parents outweighs his or her mother's right to bodily sovereignty. An essential step in answering this question is determining whether the prenatal offspring has any rights to begin with. A critical element of this step is determining when the prenatal offspring becomes a human being.

While some distinguish between human beings and human persons, and therefore contend that a human being does not necessarily possess human rights, I think all would agree that membership in the human species is a necessary, if not sufficient, criteria for human personhood. Accordingly, it is still necessary to answer the following question: at what point during pregnancy, if at all, is a human being created?

I believe that a human being is created at fertilization. This is not a matter of personal opinion, but a biological fact. It follows from the common biological understanding of sexual reproduction that human development begins when the haploid sperm and egg combine to form the diploid zygote. The point at which human development begins is the point at which a new human being is created.

There is substantial evidence from standard embryological texts to support this claim:

Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.

Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon development) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual...A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.

Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitues the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.

Clark Edward Corliss, Patten's Human Embryology: Elements of Clinical Development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1976. p. 30.

The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.

Jan Langman, Medical Embryology, 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975. p. 3.

Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.

E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.

The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.

J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman, Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1974. pp. 17, 23.


Many other popular scientific and reference works also make this claim:

Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization.

The Biology of Prenatal Develpment, National Geographic, 2006. [Video]

The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual's unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005. [Video]

Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life.

Douglas Considine (ed.), Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia, 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976. p. 943.

In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, whch is the start of a new individual.

Time Magazine and Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body. New York: Rand-McNally, 1980. pp. 139, 144.

A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg.

"Pregnancy," The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. Macropedia, Vol. 14 (Chicago: Encyclo. Brit., 1974) 968.


A number of prominent scientists and physicians have also made this claim:

It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive...It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School

I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic

The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School

The basic fact is simple: Life begins not at birth, but conception.

Ashley Montague, Geneticist and Professor at Harvard University and Rutgers University


An official U.S. Senate report on the question of when life begins reached the following conclusion:

Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being - a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.

Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.


What does NSG think?
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 58536
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:45 am

Being a human is unimportant.
Being a person is. I'll gladly extend rights to a cuttle fish or a sponge if it demonstrates personhood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood
Ostro.MOV

There is an out of control trolley speeding towards Jeremy Bentham, who is tied to the track. You can pull the lever to cause the trolley to switch tracks, but on the other track is Immanuel Kant. Bentham is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Critique of Pure Reason. Kant is clutching the only copy in the universe of The Principles of Moral Legislation. Both men are shouting at you that they have recently started to reconsider their ethical stances.

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:46 am

Railana wrote:The fundamental question associated with the abortion issue is whether or not the prenatal offspring's right to life and to care from his or her parents outweighs his or her mother's right to bodily sovereignty. An essential step in answering this question is determining whether the prenatal offspring has any rights to begin with. A critical element of this step is determining when the prenatal offspring becomes a human being.

While some distinguish between human beings and human persons, and therefore contend that a human being does not necessarily possess human rights, I think all would agree that membership in the human species is a necessary, if not sufficient, criteria for human personhood. Accordingly, it is still necessary to answer the following question: at what point during pregnancy, if at all, is a human being created?

I believe that a human being is created at fertilization. This is not a matter of personal opinion, but a biological fact. It follows from the common biological understanding of sexual reproduction that human development begins when the haploid sperm and egg combine to form the diploid zygote. The point at which human development begins is the point at which a new human being is created.

There is substantial evidence from standard embryological texts to support this claim:

Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.

Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon development) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual...A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.

Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitues the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.

Clark Edward Corliss, Patten's Human Embryology: Elements of Clinical Development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1976. p. 30.

The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.

Jan Langman, Medical Embryology, 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975. p. 3.

Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.

E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.

The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.

J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman, Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1974. pp. 17, 23.


Many other popular scientific and reference works also make this claim:

Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization.

The Biology of Prenatal Develpment, National Geographic, 2006. [Video]

The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual's unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005. [Video]

Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life.

Douglas Considine (ed.), Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia, 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976. p. 943.

In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, whch is the start of a new individual.

Time Magazine and Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body. New York: Rand-McNally, 1980. pp. 139, 144.

A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg.

"Pregnancy," The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. Macropedia, Vol. 14 (Chicago: Encyclo. Brit., 1974) 968.


A number of prominent scientists and physicians have also made this claim:

It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive...It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School

I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.

Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion...it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic

The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School

The basic fact is simple: Life begins not at birth, but conception.

Ashley Montague, Geneticist and Professor at Harvard University and Rutgers University


An official U.S. Senate report on the question of when life begins reached the following conclusion:

Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being - a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.

Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.


What does NSG think?


Yes, or very shortly thereafter. But just because a cell or cells are human doesn't mean that that cell(s) are a person. Not all humans are people, therefor not all humans are entitled to rights. Human rights are actually quite a misnomer. I mean after all dead people are still human they just aren't alive anymore, but we certainly don't afford them many "human rights". ;)
Last edited by Llamalandia on Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:47 am

Ostroeuropa wrote:Being a human is unimportant.
Being a person is. I'll gladly extend rights to a cuttle fish or a sponge if it demonstrates personhood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood


Dang it you beat me too it. ;)

User avatar
Divair2
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6666
Founded: Feb 23, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair2 » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:48 am

That's nice. Nobody is disputing this.

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:53 am

Divair2 wrote:That's nice. Nobody is disputing this.


Well there is an argument to be made that every human which is a potential person should be treated as if they are an actual person. This I believe is the position of most modern prolifers. Hence by that view because potential people equal actual people in terms of rights then arguably one could say that pershood also begins at fertilization. Of course in reality not all potential people become actual people and some become more than one person and on and on.... ;)

User avatar
Divair2
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6666
Founded: Feb 23, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair2 » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:54 am

Llamalandia wrote:
Divair2 wrote:That's nice. Nobody is disputing this.


Well there is an argument to be made that every human which is a potential person should be treated as if they are an actual person. This I believe is the position of most modern prolifers. Hence by that view because potential people equal actual people in terms of rights then arguably one could say that pershood also begins at fertilization. Of course in reality not all potential people become actual people and some become more than one person and on and on.... ;)

And potential means nothing. We are all potential corpses, should we start burying ourselves now?

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:56 am

Ostroeuropa wrote:Being a human is unimportant.
Being a person is. I'll gladly extend rights to a cuttle fish or a sponge if it demonstrates personhood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood


I recognize in the OP that some distinguish between human beings and human persons. I'd rather this thread stick to debating when a human being (as opposed to a human person) is created during pregnancy.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Corrian
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 74852
Founded: Mar 19, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Corrian » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:59 am

I read this title as "Is a human being created out of fertilizer?" and I was like "The hell?"
My Last.FM and RYM

Look on the bright side, one day you'll be dead~Street Sects

User avatar
Divair2
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6666
Founded: Feb 23, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Divair2 » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:59 am

Corrian wrote:I read this title as "Is a human being created out of fertilizer?" and I was like "The hell?"

Babies are made of cow shit. The horror! THE HORROR!

User avatar
Conscentia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26681
Founded: Feb 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Conscentia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:01 am

Depends on whether you are willing to call a zygote a human. I'm not. It has no characteristics of a human.

Many of those quotes speak of human development. What the OP fails to recognise is that development doesn't begin with the end product (a human).
Last edited by Conscentia on Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:02 am

Railana wrote:
Ostroeuropa wrote:Being a human is unimportant.
Being a person is. I'll gladly extend rights to a cuttle fish or a sponge if it demonstrates personhood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood


I recognize in the OP that some distinguish between human beings and human persons. I'd rather this thread stick to debating when a human being (as opposed to a human person) is created during pregnancy.


Well if we did that this would likely be a short thread. I mean if it has the 23 paris of chromosomes associated with humans then yes it is obviously a human being (or was at one time a part of one)./Thread

User avatar
Bulgar Rouge
Minister
 
Posts: 2406
Founded: Dec 08, 2013
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Bulgar Rouge » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:04 am

Corrian wrote:I read this title as "Is a human being created out of fertilizer?" and I was like "The hell?"


So that's how dem Asians became so many ! They just ejaculate in the fields and grow humans from trees.

This nation does not reflect my RL views.
Singaporean Transhumans wrote:I'm only saying that, well, even commies have reached the level of selling counterfeit and drugs in their storefronts, we can't be any less.

The Holy Therns wrote:Politicians make statements. It's their substitute for achievement.

User avatar
Conscentia
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26681
Founded: Feb 04, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Conscentia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:04 am

Llamalandia wrote:
Railana wrote:
I recognize in the OP that some distinguish between human beings and human persons. I'd rather this thread stick to debating when a human being (as opposed to a human person) is created during pregnancy.


Well if we did that this would likely be a short thread. I mean if it has the 23 paris of chromosomes associated with humans then yes it is obviously a human being (or was at one time a part of one)./Thread

My skin cells have human chromosomes in them. A single skin cell is not a human.

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:09 am

Conscentia wrote:Depends on whether you are willing to call a zygote a human. I'm not. It has no characteristics of a human.

Many of those quotes speak of human development. What the OP fails to recognise is that development doesn't begin with the end product (a human).


A human being is a human being throughout the entire process of human development. A newborn, a toddler, an adolescent, an adult and an elderly person are all human beings, even though they are at different stages of human development. The same reasoning applies to the zygote, the embryo and the fetus.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:10 am

Llamalandia wrote:
Railana wrote:
I recognize in the OP that some distinguish between human beings and human persons. I'd rather this thread stick to debating when a human being (as opposed to a human person) is created during pregnancy.


Well if we did that this would likely be a short thread. I mean if it has the 23 paris of chromosomes associated with humans then yes it is obviously a human being (or was at one time a part of one)./Thread


Well, I think it's important to make it clear that zygotes are human beings, not merely a collection of human cells. Unlike an arm, a leg or some skin flakes, a zygote is an individual member of the human species.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:12 am

Conscentia wrote:
Llamalandia wrote:
Well if we did that this would likely be a short thread. I mean if it has the 23 paris of chromosomes associated with humans then yes it is obviously a human being (or was at one time a part of one)./Thread

My skin cells have human chromosomes in them. A single skin cell is not a human.


True but it is or was a part of a human at one point in time. You gotta read the parentheticals my friend ;)

User avatar
Shilya
Minister
 
Posts: 2609
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Shilya » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:12 am

Railana wrote:
Llamalandia wrote:
Well if we did that this would likely be a short thread. I mean if it has the 23 paris of chromosomes associated with humans then yes it is obviously a human being (or was at one time a part of one)./Thread


Well, I think it's important to make it clear that zygotes are human beings, not merely a collection of human cells. Unlike an arm, a leg or some skin flakes, a zygote is an individual member of the human species.


That's a pretty arbitrary decision you make there. Once you no longer account for the mind, it's hard to argue what is and what isn't an individual human.

Frankly, I consider the start of the person, as opposed to the human, being relevant, and starting somewhere along with brain activity.
Impeach freedom, government is welfare, Ron Paul is theft, legalize 2016!

User avatar
Immoren
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65556
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Immoren » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:19 am

Ostroeuropa wrote:Being a human is unimportant.
Being a person is. I'll gladly extend rights to a cuttle fish or a sponge if it demonstrates personhood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood


Indeed

Corrian wrote:I read this title as "Is a human being created out of fertilizer?" and I was like "The hell?"


I did that too.
IC Flag Is a Pope Principia
discoursedrome wrote:everyone knows that quote, "I know not what weapons World War Three will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones," but in a way it's optimistic and inspiring because it suggests that even after destroying civilization and returning to the stone age we'll still be sufficiently globalized and bellicose to have another world war right then and there

User avatar
Gauthier
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52887
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Gauthier » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:23 am

If life started at fertilization it wouldn't need implantation to survive now would it?
Crimes committed by Muslims will be a pan-Islamic plot and proof of Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of loners who do not represent their belief system at all.
The probability of one's participation in homosexual acts is directly proportional to one's public disdain and disgust for homosexuals.
If a political figure makes an accusation of wrongdoing without evidence, odds are probable that the accuser or an associate thereof has in fact committed the very same act, possibly to a worse degree.
Where is your God-Emperor now?

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:25 am

Shilya wrote:
Railana wrote:
Well, I think it's important to make it clear that zygotes are human beings, not merely a collection of human cells. Unlike an arm, a leg or some skin flakes, a zygote is an individual member of the human species.


That's a pretty arbitrary decision you make there. Once you no longer account for the mind, it's hard to argue what is and what isn't an individual human.

Frankly, I consider the start of the person, as opposed to the human, being relevant, and starting somewhere along with brain activity.


Right well that was my original point that personhood is the real issue not whether or not some cell happens to be or to have been part of a human. ;)

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:26 am

Shilya wrote:
Railana wrote:
Well, I think it's important to make it clear that zygotes are human beings, not merely a collection of human cells. Unlike an arm, a leg or some skin flakes, a zygote is an individual member of the human species.


That's a pretty arbitrary decision you make there. Once you no longer account for the mind, it's hard to argue what is and what isn't an individual human.

Frankly, I consider the start of the person, as opposed to the human, being relevant, and starting somewhere along with brain activity.


In my view, the defining characteristic for human personhood is the inherent capacity for sapience; that is to say, the ability to develop sapience as part of the ordinary course of human development.

This actually makes a lot of sense when you consider the case of infants. A newborn is not capable of any meaningful rational thought, and many animals have a greater intellectual capacity. Yet the newborn is considered a person while animals are not. This is because the newborn will develop those faculties later in life.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Llamalandia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10637
Founded: Dec 07, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Llamalandia » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:27 am

Gauthier wrote:If life started at fertilization it wouldn't need implantation to survive now would it?


So by that logic frozen embryos aren't really alive anymore? Or for that matter zygotes created in a lab for invitro fertilization aren't alive? :eyebrow:

User avatar
Railana
Diplomat
 
Posts: 518
Founded: Apr 11, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Railana » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:29 am

Gauthier wrote:If life started at fertilization it wouldn't need implantation to survive now would it?


A human being can be alive yet dependent on another.
Dominion of Railana
Also known as Auralia

"Lex naturalis voluntas Dei est."

User avatar
Big Jim P
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55158
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Big Jim P » Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:29 am

Llamalandia wrote:
Conscentia wrote:My skin cells have human chromosomes in them. A single skin cell is not a human.


True but it is or was a part of a human at one point in time. You gotta read the parentheticals my friend ;)


What book of the Bible is that?
Hail Satan!
Happily married to Roan Cara, The first RL NS marriage, and Pope Joan is my Father-in-law.
I edit my posts to fix typos.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Aggicificicerous, Ancientania, Dimetrodon Empire, Ineva, Keltionialang, Likhinia, Plan Neonie, Simonia, Talibanada, The Black Forrest, The Overmind, Tungstan

Advertisement

Remove ads