"Since Lewis Wolpert"? From the information I could find, he still holds the position of Emeritus Professor of Biology as applied to Medicine in the Department of Anatomy and developmental biology at University College London. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Wolpert Do you think the Pope's declaration that life begins at conception was based on science? It wasn't. Except that the fetus is not separate. It is attached to the woman, and if it is separated before viability, it will never be a human. Also, just because cells are alive, that doesn't mean they are living a life. I disagree that that the unborn are "separate and distinct living humans."
Separate in the DNA sense, not in the feeding tube sense. That is like saying anyone strapped to an IV is cyborg now and not a separate and distinct specimen from the IV unit.
No I don't base my beliefs on philosophies adopted by popes or head abortion scientists. Is this guy of yours old? Then he is probably stuck in his old hipster ways. No need for his opinion unless he can show a fetus is the same living human as the mother. If he can't, then it is all hocus pocus from there.
You need to work past your elementary level biology. DNA does not define a being just the species. Why do you need to move the goal posts. Now you introduced certain capacities in order to be a being and reproduction is certainly not one possessed by a fetus. We have enough wars abroad, we don't need to encourage a few more at home. I have to disagree with that policy. Maybe you like collateral damage, but I am no fan of spreading it.[/QUOTE]But you accept it or are you just as fervently fighting against that too?
Of course dismiss a recognized authority on a subject matter because it does not agree with your uninformed opinion.
You have no clue what homeostasis is do you? I am glad you demonstrated the scientific knowledge you apply to the topic.
The first time it divided and showed sustained ability to reproduce its own cells and replicates its DNA.
Does he discover that is is not living? Does he discover it is not human? did he discover the fetus is the same human as the mother? How is what he thinks relevant then? I don't care what opinion someone has, lets see evidence thy refutes either question. I can also list a bunch of PhDs that agree with me, so where does that lead us? Are you arguing for them, or with me over abortion? Do you agree with his reasoning? if so, why so? Etc... - - - Updated - - - Do not all mammals go through the same stage in their life? Controlling temperature, what is your point? Babies in incubators are not human either? When the leave an incubator now another magical occurrence happens?
what does that have to do with it? Commonality is hardly the issue. No it is not a thermostat. I suggest you broaden your understanding of the process before attempting to dismiss it. Oh please, it is enough that you argue from ignorance, but is this drivel really needed?
Answer the question if it is different. Don't just say it is drivel and dodge. That is lefty tactic number 4. I understand biology just fine. That is as much definition as you get from an iPhone, it covers the important stuff. Now tell me if cells that can reproduce and grow are alive or dead? Just one answer please keep it simple alive or dead. I don't need philosophy, I don't need a change of argument, just alive or dead? - - - Updated - - - human for sure, DNA proves it unequivocally. Once multiplied it is alive. "Being" apparently is a superstitious word with a subjective meaning. So we are using living human, because that is clearly what it is.
I did not realize that there was a question. All I saw was an exhibition of lack of understanding of what homeostasis is. The fact that you had to look it up on your iphone is further proof of the fact that you ARE clueless on the topic. As thoroughly educated from an iphone. I am sure you even have a graduate degree you earned on it. Yes of course they are alive, much like cancer cells, yet those are not a human being. What is the problem, your iphone does not have an app for that?
I am posting from an iPhone work on your reading. Go back, when you see something g that looks like this "?" The words before that form a question. You answer it with a sentence that ends with a "."
My reading is just fine, much better in fact than your understanding of homeostasis, which you did have to look up on your iphone. "That is as much definition as you get from an iPhone." "Do not all mammals go through the same stage in their life?" while it is a question it is entirely irrelevant to the topic and nothing more than your attempt to mask your lacking knowledge. That is why it merited no answer.
No its a lego set......LMAO The egg is human...the sperm is human....when they connect...they form together a new life...a new human life... not a rock, or a CD or a car...or a bullet proof vest...A NEW LIVING HUMAN BEING...that is not an inanimate object. IT IS LIVING...GROWING.....IT EXISTS....it exists because in order for it to go away...it has to be killed. Yes killed. That is what you and others condone.
A person who needs an IV for life support, or any medical device, is not attached to that one device for its survival. Any IV or another medical device can be replaced at any time. A zef is attached to one woman on whom it depends for its survival. No other woman can be substituted. As long as its survival depends upon that attachment, it is not separate.
...reproduction begins. Prove it. Actually most of them fail to implant and are flushed away during menstruation. You and others condone forcing women to use their bodies against their will--slavery.
Oh, so if a human is dependent on another human, that can't be substituted then it is OK to end their life? Is that the principle? - - - Updated - - - [QUOTE} Actually most of them fail to implant and are flushed away during menstruation. [/QUOTE] No act of force involved there, no crime. Slavery is forcing another human to labor for your own profits. That isn't what childbirth is at all. Fetuses grown for stem cells are more akin to slaves then mothers are. That is like saying every drunk driver forced to do time is a slave.
Big nothing. Big dodge. How are babies in incubators different? Can they be killed because they lack self sufficient homeostasis?
You want to force women to labor against their will for your own perceived moralty, or as a punishment. That is slavery. A drunk driver clearly commits a crime and endangers other (actual) people. Abortion is not a crime in almost all civilized first world countries.
AAAAARRGRRRGHHHHHHHH what if drunk driving was legalized? Okay, so anything that's okay is legal? By this sick logic, the Holocaust was okay. Using the status quo current laws to justify how the laws should be is just a very circular argument.
I'm not justifying anything. SETTLE DOWN and stop raving about circular arguments. There is a consensus that drunk driving is wrong. Do you understand you don't have a consensus that abortion is wrong???
They do not lack homeostasis. Why not take the time to at least attempt to understand the notion of homeostasis before asking stupid questions that only underscore your lack of knowledge? - - - Updated - - - They do not lack homeostasis. Why not take the time to at least attempt to understand the notion of homeostasis before asking stupid questions that only underscore your lack of knowledge?
