whitnebrat wrote:
You can laugh, but let me point out that for any other species on earth, an offspring is not considered "alive" until it is "born" ... i.e. breathing and suckling. In humans, the debate rages as to when the fetus is alive; be it at conception, at viability, or when the umbilical cord is cut. That definition is one that is not scientifically provable, and is dependent on what your religious views are. To claim otherwise is motivated by what sect you belong to. Therefore I put it into the religious/moral category.
Even after birth, in many cultures, infanticide is practiced because of religious belief about the ability of the child to contribute to the society (be it through physical or mental inability), or a belief that one sex or the other is more valuable to the culture. If you make the claim that humans are "exceptional", that again is a religious concept mainly of Mosaic roots. Many native American and Eastern religions do not share that viewpoint.
And by the way, as I have said before, I have to give the Catholic church credit for sticking to similar views on abortion and the death penalty. In my view, you can't be for one and not the other, and at least they are consistent in that regard.
And I'm not in anyone's "camp". I am a pragmatic realist ... or what you would probably call a libertarian (culturally liberal and fiscally conservative.) Many of you think that I am an anti-religious bigot, which I am not, since I criticize all religions for their rigidity, intolerance and oppression, be it Hindu, Buddhist, Moslem, Shinto, Christian, Mosaic or any other.
End of sermon, your mileage may vary.
You can laugh, but let me point out that for any o... (
show quote)
Beginning of human personhood
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
For origins of humans as a species, see Human evolution.
Human embryo at 8-cell stage
The beginning of human personhood is the moment when a human is first recognized as a person. There are differences of opinion as to the precise time when human personhood begins and the nature of that status. The issue arises in a number of fields including science, religion, philosophy, and law, and is most acute in debates relating to abortion, stem cell research, reproductive rights, and fetal rights.
Traditionally, the concept of personhood has entailed the concept of soul, a metaphysical concept referring to a non-corporeal or extra-corporeal dimension of human being. However, in modernity, the concepts of subjectivity and intersubjectivity, personhood, mind, and self have come to encompass a number of aspects of human being previously considered to be characteristics of the soul.[1][2] With regard to the beginning of human personhood, one historical question has been: when does the soul enter the body? In modern terms, the question could be put instead: at what point does the developing individual develop personhood or selfhood?[3]
Related issues attached to the question of the beginning of human personhood include both the legal status, bodily integrity, and subjectivity of mothers[4] and the philosophical concept of "natality" (i.e. "the distinctively human capacity to initiate a new beginning", which a new human life embodies).[5]
Contents
1 Fertilization
2 Philosophical and religious perspectives
3 Personhood in law
3.1 Ecclesiastical courts
3.2 Common law
3.3 Implantation
3.4 Segmentation
3.5 Brain function (brain birth)
3.6 Fetal viability
3.7 Birth
4 Other markers
4.1 Individuation
5 Ethical perspectives
6 Legal perspectives
6.1 Ireland
6.2 United States
7 See also
8 References
Fertilization[edit]
Fertilization is the fusing of the gametes, that is a sperm cell and an ovum (egg cell), to form a zygote. At this point, the zygote is genetically distinct from either of its parents.
Fertilization was not understood in ancient times. Alexander the Great and Augustus Caesar were reputed to have been conceived without fertilization (virgin birth). Hippocrates believed that the embryo was the product of male semen and a female factor. But Aristotle held that only male semen gave rise to an embryo, while the female only provided a place for the embryo to develop,[6] (a concept he acquired from the preformationist Pythagoras). William Harvey refuted Aristotle's idea that menstrual blood could be involved in the formation of a fetus, asserting that eggs from the female were somehow caused to become a fetus as a result of sexual intercourse.[7] Sperm cells were discovered in 1677 by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, who believed that Aristotle had been proven correct.[8] Some observers believed they could see an entirely pre-formed little human body in the head of a sperm.[9] The human ova was first observed in 1827 by Karl Ernst von Baer.[8] Only in 1876 did Oscar Hertwig prove that fertilization is due to fusion of an egg and sperm cell.[6]
Some members of the medical community accept fertilization as the point at which life begins. Dr. Bradley M. Patten from the University of Michigan wrote in Human Embryology that the union of the sperm and the ovum "initiates the life of a new individual" beginning "a new individual life history." In the standard college text book Psychology and Life, Dr. Floyd L. Ruch wrote "At the time of conception, two living germ cells—the sperm from the father and the egg, or ovum, from the mother—unite to produce a new individual." Dr. Herbert Ratner wrote that "It is now of unquestionable certainty that a human being comes into existence precisely at the moment when the sperm combines with the egg." This certain knowledge, Ratner says, comes from the study of genetics. At fertilization, all of the genetic characteristics, such as the color of the eyes, "are laid down determinatively." James C. G. Conniff noted the prevalence of the above views in a study published by The New York Times Magazine in which he wrote, "At that moment conception takes place and, scientists generally agree, a new life begins—silent, secret, unknown."[10]
The view that life begins at fertilization reached acceptance from mainstream sources at one point. In 1967, New York City school officials launched a large sex education program. The fifth grade textbook stated "Human life begins when the sperm cells of the father and the egg cells of the mother unite. This union is referred to as fertilization. For fertilization to take place and a baby to begin growing, the sperm cell must come in direct contact with the egg cell." Similarly, a textbook used in Evanston, Illinois stated: "Life begins when a sperm cell and an ovum (egg cell) unite."[11] Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft goes so far as to say "This is widely accepted still today and has been verified by the scientific community".[12]
"To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization: the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte,usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.
As you can see from this article, there are those that believe that life at conception has been proven scientifically. Religion had absolutely nothing to do with the decisions of Dr. Bradley Patten, Dr. Floyd Ruch, Dr. Albert Katherine or James C G Conniff! Once again, your opinion is not a fact.