Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (9) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: JoshRandall Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 196275  
Subject: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Beings Date: 10/8/2012 11:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V...!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183337 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 1:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"From the moment of conception, the unborn are individual organisms."



False. More lies from the anti-choice extremists.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Mark12547 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183339 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 2:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"From the moment of conception, the unborn are individual organisms."

False. More lies from the anti-choice extremists.

It's true that it has its own unique DNA, distinct and separate from the mother's DNA. And it is growing, developing its own brain and circulatory system.

However, until it is born, it is completely dependent on the mother for everything it needs in the form of nourishment, oxygen, and waste disposal. Some would even say it is dependent on the parents (or equivalent) for survival until the parents kick it out of the house almost two decades later, and sometimes longer. :)

Is anything I typed above false?

Is your complaint with the phrase, "individual organisms"?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183349 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 12:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Part of the definition of "organism" is the ability to reproduce. A fetus is not capable of this. FYI.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lhaselden Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183354 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 1:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<<
Part of the definition of "organism" is the ability to reproduce. A fetus is not capable of this. FYI.
>>

Neither are most 90 year olds... are you trying to say my parents are not living organisms?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183356 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 2:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
A good point. Also infertile adults. Children. Mules.

But if you look up the definition, that is what it says (among other things). A blastula is not capable of reproduction. It doesn't even have the needed equipment yet.

Another characteristic is the ability to maintain homeostasis (which I don't believe a blastula or fetus can do either).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183357 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 2:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
Is your complaint with the phrase, "individual organisms"?



Identical twins or triplets are not individual organisms at the moment of conception. One cell cannot contain more than one human. Any definition of "human being" MUST include being able to quantify the number of humans being discussed, because human beings are by definition individual and distinct.

At the moment of conception, you cannot differentiate between single, twins, triplets, etc. This fact alone proves that the fertilized egg cannot be considered as a human being.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: benjd25 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183359 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/9/2012 4:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Identical twins or triplets are not individual organisms at the moment of conception. One cell cannot contain more than one human. Any definition of "human being" MUST include being able to quantify the number of humans being discussed, because human beings are by definition individual and distinct.

At the moment of conception, you cannot differentiate between single, twins, triplets, etc. This fact alone proves that the fertilized egg cannot be considered as a human being.


Also, with chimeras, you can end up with one human being from two conceptions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)#Human_chimer...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Windchasers Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 183450 of 196275
Subject: Re: Does Science Show That the Unborn R Human Be Date: 10/11/2012 2:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
It's true that it has its own unique DNA, distinct and separate from the mother's DNA. And it is growing, developing its own brain and circulatory system.

However, until it is born, it is completely dependent on the mother for everything it needs in the form of nourishment, oxygen, and waste disposal. Some would even say it is dependent on the parents (or equivalent) for survival until the parents kick it out of the house almost two decades later, and sometimes longer. :)

Is anything I typed above false?



Aye, there's the crux. The fetus is not biologically or physically independent from its mother. That independence starts at birth.

Not biologically independent = not an individual organism.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (9) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement