Simple True or False Poll about Human Beings

This poll is inspired by the Abortion thread : "What is it?"

True or False Question;

"A human being is a human being - even when they are only in the zygote stage of their life, growth, development, etc."

 

I probably should have added this to the first post.

When Does Human Life Begin? A Scientific Perspective



For those who voted No, I would like to know (from you) - If a human being in the zygote stage of their life is not a human being - what kind of being are they? .

 

A collection of cells.

 

How does that become a true/false question without defining when consciousness (not nerve reflex) begins? If a zygote is conscious, then I vote that it is human.

 

Thats pretty much where I am - Got a brain wave, no matter how rudimentary, you have a human being

 

Did you read the article?

All human beings (human organisms) are but collections of cells.

- - - Updated - - -

Did you read the scientific explanation for that?

 

Only, brainwaves are not required for that.

That's one of the many misconceptions I am trying to bring awareness to.

 

I am really not going to engage in a debate on the topic. I offered my personal view. I have absolutely no interest in defending that personal opinion

 

Suit yourself.

The facts aren't going to go away though.

 

2 centuries ago, we'd be arguing if sperm was sacred.

 

Who said anything about even humans being sacred?

 

That is not a misconception. 'Human-ness' is not defined by science, it is defined by theologians and philosophers who really know no more about it than you or I. I choose to call it 'human' when consciousness arises. And my definition is as good as anybody's.

 

My point was that perceptions change as far as classifying life goes.

Technically, you could say a zygote is a separate life, but then again, so is bacteria, a virus, an egg, and a sperm.

A zygote isn't a separate "human being" anymore than a baby is an adult.

But the biological definition of life really doesn't hold much weight in a legal sense anyway. The legality of abortion is based upon viability, not whether the fetus/zygote is a separate life.

 

Not a chance.

Every time I urinate, I pass a collection of human cells. You, too.

 

It seems fair. When you no longer have brainwaves at the end of life, they call you 'dead'. They may also call you a 'dead human', but you're not human anymore.

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2120872/
"a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn't possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that, the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead."

 

Wow, way to read way past the poll question.

This was only a biological question.

A factual question.

- - - Updated - - -

It's your ignorance.

Wallow away.

 

I notice you quote wikipedia in your signature.

 

Are children with no cerebral cortex's "human beings?"

Anencephalic children have only a brain stem. They have no capacity for thought, taste, ability to feel pain, see, smell or hear.

Are they human beings?

Our laws say they are.

 

Then the answer is simple. A zygote isn't a human being in any sense other than the vaguest resemblance.

You can argue that it is a "potential human being," but that's not the same as being a human being outright.

 

Wiki is a collection of other people's materials.

Here is another source for the same conclusion.

Your point?

 

Wow.

Just wow.

Is it that you deny the fact that human beings are human organisms?

Or are you denying that science would or should have anything to do with that?

Help me out here.

 

A human sperm and egg cell (un-united reproductive cells) have only the 'potential' to create that which a human in the zygote stage of life already is.

True or false?

 

Of course it's a human being...and I am completely support allowing the mothers of "human being babies" to kill thier "human being babies" in the first and second trimesters of development...upon demand.

Emotional appeals won't work on me, because "human being babies" without a developed cerebral cortex are no more sentient than my liver.

And don't you dare try dragging me into the false standpoint where you portray me as being glad "human being babies" in the 1st and 2nd trimester are being killed.

 

Sorry, false actually.

It would be true if you phrased it like this: A human sperm and egg cell have only the 'potential' to create a human zygote.