I see a lot of pro-choicers who don't specify when they believe human life begins, since they're arguing strictly from a "woman's rights" perspective. When would they say the fetus qualifies as a human life in terms of biology?
Unique human life begins at conception (as in unique and living DNA in a zygote). Life itself began several billion years ago and is a forever continuing process. Does that help? I personally feel like it being alive is rather irrelevant to the subject at hand. I am of the opinion that no human being born or not has the right to use another human being's body for any reason including survival against that person's will.
Does a DNA have a brain or any awareness? Would you say a tree is the same as a 'human life' or even an animal life just because it has 'living DNA'? Or by that logic then would you say a braindead person is still "alive" just like anyone else simply because they have living DNA and their body continues to perform it's primary functions? I think that what society uses to determine if a form of life has worth, or how much worth it has - is it's cognitive function, not the mere fact that it has "DNA". This is why a bacteria isn't a valued form of life, or why killing an insect isn't as controversial as killing a dog, but killing a dog isn't as controversial as killing a human - the higher the level of cognitive function, the more valued the life (and the more pain it experiences when it is killed). So how can you say that 'human life beings' the second after conception - when an embryo which is about the size of a gnat's brain does not yet have any cognitive ability of its own? It's hypocritical for you to hold that stance if you're saying you believe it begins at conception
No. No. I am starting to think you did not understand what I posted and I am also starting to think you have not made it clear exactly what definition of 'alive' you are using. There are several definitions I have seen people use for saying something is alive. One of them is that if it has biological functions and it continues to grow and age then it is alive. For example, a brain dead person, while they may not have cognitive mental functions their physical body is still technically 'alive' if they are on say life support. This would keep their blood flowing, their cells functioning, their lungs breathing and their physical anatomy 'alive'. The other is more of an informal use of the word to describe someone who is alive and enjoying life and who is aware and experiencing their surroundings. Is this the definition you are using? Because I took it as the first definition. In this definition however a brain dead person may seem completely dead depending on your use of the word 'alive'. How so?
Perhaps the question will be more clear if you tell us what definition of the term 'alive' you are using. Anyways, I am off to work but I will be back to this thread later. I am curious to see the responses and the definition you choose.
I'd say biological life which is valued in general by society, versus life which isn't - from what I see the cognitive ability is what determined
So more specifically it is not so much 'life' as in being a living being with functioning cells and such that matters to you but actual brain function?
Basically yes, I think that's a more consistent definition that's used to determine when life deserves protection
Urm...I hate to be that one person who awkwardly points this out, but wouldn't that have been more clear if you had just said that in the OP instead of using an unclear definition of 'alive'? So when does brain function start? Around 30 weeks of pregnancy, roughly, give or take a few? So life deserves protection around 30 weeks of pregnancy - in your opinion.
A new unique human life begins at conception. It's important to note that this does not mean that individuality begins at conception. That does not occur until birth, until you are separated and disconnected from your mother. Prior to that you are not an individual, you are simply a part of another individual. And if you're not an individual, you don't get rights intended for individuals.
Conservatively about 24 weeks. Grey area up to 30. A side note to this is that several times pro life politicians have pushed for protection at 20 or 24 weeks which on the surface seemed reasonable. The problems I had with them were the attachments they put on these state bills. Not the general sentiment.
Let us see now, you start of with a false premise, add in another two false premise and then ask a question based on the false premises used. first false premise - pro-choice people know and state quite often when human life begins, and though the strictly correct answer is millions of years ago the answer you seem to crave is human life starts at conception - that is human adjective not human noun. second false premise - that it is all about womens rights, when the reality is it is about the rights that ALL people have and the pro-life agenda to try and remove some of those rights from pregnant women. third false premise - that the pro-choice argument is based solely from the woman's perspective, when in reality it is based on the perspective of the rights that all people have. So to answer your question, now that the false premises have been shown. human (adjective) life starts at conception, a human (noun) life starts at birth when that life does not have a biological dependency on another person.
I'm pro-life. My view is that we aren't certain when human life begans, but without a doubt, it doesn't happen before the moment of conception. IMHO, in the interest of not killing a possible human life, the moment of conception is the safest assumption for the beginning of human life. That said, I'm also a pragmatist. At this time, I'd be happy if we had the same rules about abortion that most of the European Union has--12 weeks being the limit to elective abortion in most of Europe.
Please show the link to this 30 weeks thing? Brain function (measurable brain waves starts at about 12 weeks). By 17 weeks, the fetus has developed eyesight. 24 weeks is pretty much survivable outside of the womb. http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/week-17.aspx http://miscarriage.about.com/od/pregnancyafterloss/a/prematurebirth.htm
Link to prove your contention. Preemies have about a 39% chance of survival at 24 weeks (17% at 23 weeks) 90+ percent at 30 weeks. >>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<< http://miscarriage.about.com/od/pregnancyafterloss/a/prematurebirth.htm
Its hard to get a definitive answer but I will put a link below. Parts of the brain work pretty early on in order to help fetal development, but they do not grant the fetus cognizance, they are just the parts of the brain that take care of the heartbeat and so on. Premies can be kept alive before their brain is able to dream. Perhaps at some time in the future very early embryos can be kept alive, it still doesn't mean they are developed enough to achieve personhood. A line needs to be drawn somewhere. Right now there are thousands and thousands of frozen fertilized embryos in fertility clinics, is each of them a person in your opinion? They have a limited shelf life and if they are not implanted within a certain amount of time they lose viability. How do we save them? Anyway I am sorry this effects you so strongly. Few of us are murderous, we just do not recognize an undeveloped fetus a person. http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/your-baby/week-30/headway.aspx
Human life began about 200,000 years ago...individual Human Beings are considered such upon being born. Thought might begin about the 6-8 month mark in a human fetus.
A common misconception is that the electrical activity measured at 12 weeks is in fact brain waves, it is not. A common set of results used for this is an experiment where it was claimed that brain waves were recorded at 12 weeks .. however, two students repeated the experiment with the same results on a bowl of jello, the fact is that all cells produce an electrical current and this is what was measured, not brain waves. http://www.svss-uspda.ch/pdf/brain_waves.pdf
You're asking people who only deal in feelings to answer a logical question. The results will be both hilarious and sad. Just watch.
This coming from a person who insists that abortion is murder and that all people who support a woman's choice to have an abortion are baby killers .. wow, the hypocrisy of your comment is outstanding.
When does human life begin? Since every human life is a combination of the physical body plus the soul of the individual, both must be present for the "human" to be viable. The soul is a non-material form of conscious energy. It exists prior to birth in the body, and has a separate existence not dependent upon the body, or indeed, anything physical. That's why when the physical body experiences death, the soul survives. The physical requires the soul to become a viable organism. When the soul leaves the body for any length of time, it becomes lifeless. Since we are all souls having a temporary experience in the physical world, our true selves are our souls, not the physical bodies we are so strongly identified with. Our souls were highly developed, mature entities BEFORE entering the fetus for birth. Generally, it takes up to two years after birth for the soul and the physical body to learn to work together proficiently. But to answer the original question. . . the soul can enter the fetus whenever it chooses, from conception till the moment the fetus is traveling through the birth canal to be born. It's the soul's choice. Most souls enter after the fetus is sufficiently developed to begin forming the sensitive, incredibly complex neural connections with the fetus to work together in unison as a human after birth. This can take some time, but few souls elect to enter the fetus at or near conception, because the fetal tissues aren't developed and there's really little to nothing for the soul to do there, and boredom inevitably ensues. It's also worthy of note, that an agreement between the soul and the soul of the mother (and sometimes father) is formed in the spirit world before conception. Any party to that agreement is free to change their mind and back out at any time before or during gestation. Also, any fetus that is aborted does not prevent the soul scheduled for that fetus from pursuing birth later with another fetus--even with the same parents. Abortion is not the death of a human being, it is the death of an agreement open to change. The soul of the fetus is not harmed--just delayed until a later and more appropriate time. There is nothing cruel here. It's the way the spiritual-physical relationship works, and always has.
There really are some strange people out there ... I won't even bother to list the number of illogical and unprovable things in your post, suffice to say if this is what you believe then all well and good .. but don't expect anything other than a few of these for reposnes.
The possibility of one or a number of human lives begins at conception. That these potential individuals might be unique is irrelevant. I would claim that the existence of " a human life" first requires the existence of a human. Then in order to claim that "a human life" exists at all one must first prove that a human exists. This meaning of the term has a possessive quality "its my life". If we are using the term "human" strictly as a descriptive adjective, then human life does not have a beginning as animate does not come from inanimate. Both sperm, egg, and many steps before are both human and alive.
