 |
|
and there is a difference between a newborn and a toddler,
Posted on: December 5, 2017 at 17:54:49 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
73726
Member For:
21.78 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
and a young child and a pre-teen and between pre-pubescent and post-pubescent, and teenager and young adult and middle aged and "mature adult" and elderly, but they are all part of the life cycle of human beings.
"Going back to the thought experiment, if I see the grandmother with cancer and can save her or the 1000 embryos, I'm still going to save the grandmother."
You are avoiding my thought experiment, and the critical point that it illustrates.
Let us say that you are given the choice between saving a fetus or a grandmother riddled with cancer who will die within a week. If you choose to save the unborn child does that mean that the grandmother is not a human being? Does it mean that she is worthless? Of course not.
Saving one and not the other does NOT mean that the one not saved is therefore not a human being. That is absurd, of course, as is that implication from the thought experiment given by the comic you linked to. It does not prove what he and you think it does.
"As for the woman with cancer who saved her child by not receiving treatment, good for her but that's not a choice I'd ask any woman make."
And I would not ask her to make it either, but it still illustrates the same point made in the other example above. When faced with a dilemma such that one is forced to choose between saving one or more human beings and not others that does NOT mean that the one(s) not saved are of low value nor that they are not human beings.
"An embryo can become a fetus and be born into the world as a child. An embryo is not a child though and an embryo is not a human being, it's an embryo. That's why everyone would save the child from the fire, not the embryos."
An embryo is most certainly a human being. As Dr. Dianne Irving stated it:
https://prolifepages.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/when-does-human-life-begin/
“It might surprise many that there has been an unaltered scientific consensus for half a century that a real, already existing, live, whole human being begins as a human embryo (or zygote) immediately at fertilization. This is a scientific fact – not an “opinion”, or a religious or theological belief. And public policy debates and decision making should not continue to escape that unavoidable scientific fact.”
The testimony of the top experts from around the world assembled for hearings before a U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearings on the question, “When Does Human Life Begin?”, April 23-24, 1981 all came to the same, unanimous, unambiguous answer — Human life begins at conception. A few quotes:
Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard medical School, gave confirming testimony, supported by references from over 20 embryology and other medical textbooks that human life began at conception.
* “Father of Modern Genetics” Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion … it is plain experimental evidence.”
* Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”
* Dr. Richard V. Jaynes: “To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.”
* Dr. Landrum Shettles, sometimes called the “Father of In Vitro Fertilization” notes, “Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind.” And on the Supreme Court ruling _Roe v. Wade_, “To deny a truth [about when life begins] should not be made a basis for legalizing abortion.”
* Professor Eugene Diamond: “…either the justices were fed a backwoods biology or they were pretending ignorance about a scientific certainty.”
For those who might prefer a more thorough, scientific explanation, please see Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.’s article:
When do human beings (normally) begin?
“scientific” myths and scientific facts
http://lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_01lifebegin1.html
"Going back to the thought experiment, if I see the grandmother with cancer and can save her or the 1000 embryos, I'm still going to save the grandmother."
You are avoiding my thought experiment, and the critical point that it illustrates.
Let us say that you are given the choice between saving a fetus or a grandmother riddled with cancer who will die within a week. If you choose to save the unborn child does that mean that the grandmother is not a human being? Does it mean that she is worthless? Of course not.
Saving one and not the other does NOT mean that the one not saved is therefore not a human being. That is absurd, of course, as is that implication from the thought experiment given by the comic you linked to. It does not prove what he and you think it does.
"As for the woman with cancer who saved her child by not receiving treatment, good for her but that's not a choice I'd ask any woman make."
And I would not ask her to make it either, but it still illustrates the same point made in the other example above. When faced with a dilemma such that one is forced to choose between saving one or more human beings and not others that does NOT mean that the one(s) not saved are of low value nor that they are not human beings.
"An embryo can become a fetus and be born into the world as a child. An embryo is not a child though and an embryo is not a human being, it's an embryo. That's why everyone would save the child from the fire, not the embryos."
An embryo is most certainly a human being. As Dr. Dianne Irving stated it:
https://prolifepages.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/when-does-human-life-begin/
“It might surprise many that there has been an unaltered scientific consensus for half a century that a real, already existing, live, whole human being begins as a human embryo (or zygote) immediately at fertilization. This is a scientific fact – not an “opinion”, or a religious or theological belief. And public policy debates and decision making should not continue to escape that unavoidable scientific fact.”
The testimony of the top experts from around the world assembled for hearings before a U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearings on the question, “When Does Human Life Begin?”, April 23-24, 1981 all came to the same, unanimous, unambiguous answer — Human life begins at conception. A few quotes:
Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard medical School, gave confirming testimony, supported by references from over 20 embryology and other medical textbooks that human life began at conception.
* “Father of Modern Genetics” Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion … it is plain experimental evidence.”
* Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”
* Dr. Richard V. Jaynes: “To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.”
* Dr. Landrum Shettles, sometimes called the “Father of In Vitro Fertilization” notes, “Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind.” And on the Supreme Court ruling _Roe v. Wade_, “To deny a truth [about when life begins] should not be made a basis for legalizing abortion.”
* Professor Eugene Diamond: “…either the justices were fed a backwoods biology or they were pretending ignorance about a scientific certainty.”
For those who might prefer a more thorough, scientific explanation, please see Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.’s article:
When do human beings (normally) begin?
“scientific” myths and scientific facts
http://lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_01lifebegin1.html
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
and there is a difference between a newborn and a toddler, - JeffB MU - 12/5 17:54:49