You must log in or register to comment.
No. But life beginning at conception is the only logical line to draw. Every other is arbitrary. And having arbitrary set lines for who is human and who isn’t is not something we should want. But banning abortion also doesn’t work and is cruel. Life is complicated.
No. But life beginning at conception is the only logical line to draw.
No it’s not, conception is just as arbitrary. Just because it’s the logic you adopted doesn’t mean it’s the only logical choice.
At the point of conception all you are is a small group of cells that are forming something. There is no brain, there is no heart, there is no anything that would be described as human other than the DNA. At some point during the endless splitting of those cells a heart is created to push blood around the body that has developed, a body I might add looks entirely the same no matter what species you’re looking at at this stage. And then, sometime long after that, a brain emerges but it’s nothing like what we have when we’re born. The human brain of a baby takes a long time to form. The question of “At what point does Life Begin?”, is not “At what point is something alive?”, it’s “At what point can it be considered human and not just a small group of cells working toward being a human one day?”
Anti-abortion groups are not pro-life as they like to claim. For one, more than a few of them are pro death penalty. And for two, they don’t actually care about children who are born because more than half of them actively work towards taking assistance away from single mothers and children and adoption services and Foster Care programs. Even if all they do is vote for the wrong party, they are guilty of this.
I really liked your first paragraph. I can’t argue with you regarding the second because I’m not USAian and thus live in completley different socio-political landscape.
At what point can it be considered human and not just a small group of cells working toward being a human one day?
This is intelectually stimulating position. But this same line of thought can be traced further into extremes such as eugenics and scientific racism. Because of these historical aberrations that stem from this same principle, I reject this position and thus adopt position that life begins at conception. And trying to discriminate who/what is human is dangerous and should not be done.
And trying to discriminate who/what is human is dangerous and should not be done.
By that logic, cancer treatments should be illegal.
I do not find much logic in your reply. But fear not, to me you are still human! Have a great day!
Instead of trying to define a point where something is a human based on how much it has developed, because of the associated risks and historical failings, your standpoint is that life begins at conception.
Did I understand correctly?
Correct
But… conception is when the swimmer breaks into the egg, which happened after the egg was thawed out.
If the unfertilized egg is the start of life, then this whole argument just got a lot more stupid.
