Why are zygote, embryo and fetus simply synonyms for human being?

[wmw999 2,126]

I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg and a sperm uniting are a human being?

I don't. I really, really don't. I don't think abortion is a great idea, but emphatically think it should be legal, particularly in the first 4 months or so. Yes, 4.

But I'm interested in why people think it is a full-on human being. But reasons, not just assertions.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg and a sperm uniting are a human being?

I don't. I really, really don't. I don't think abortion is a great idea, but emphatically think it should be legal, particularly in the first 4 months or so. Yes, 4.

But I'm interested in why people think it is a full-on human being. But reasons, not just assertions.

Wendy P.

I assert that I need popcorn for this one

[shropshire 0]

Cook up a lot .. we're going to need it...... oh and no salt on mine... thanks.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 2,405]

>I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg
>and a sperm uniting are a human being?

Because it makes it easier for anti-abortion types to claim victory in the ensuing debate. Changing the terms of the debate has a long history in terms of making things as black and white as possible.

I recall a while back the government tried to pass a newer version of the Patriot Act targeting "narcoterrorists." It's one thing to put an idiot teenager in jail for ten years when he buys cocaine - it's much easier to justify putting a "narcoterrorist" behind bars.

[DocPop 1]

I agree. Initially it is just a ball of dividing cells.


So is a tumor. Nobody tries to claim that a fibrosarcoma has rights.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg
>and a sperm uniting are a human being?

Because it makes it easier for anti-abortion types to claim victory in the ensuing debate. Changing the terms of the debate has a long history in terms of making things as black and white as possible.

It works both ways sir

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg and a sperm uniting are a human being?

I don't. I really, really don't. I don't think abortion is a great idea, but emphatically think it should be legal, particularly in the first 4 months or so. Yes, 4.

But I'm interested in why people think it is a full-on human being. But reasons, not just assertions.

Wendy P.

Who gets to decide when?

I cant

My personal opinion is there is no doubt once a heart beat is established

Before that time?

I really do not know

I do know which side I would error on however

And in all of this I think you know very well, my postion on abortion

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Pretty much once they can look you in the eye and express a clear thought.

Looking at their shoes and mumbling means they aren't quite there yet - and anytime prior for that matter.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[winsor 186]

Quote

I'm trying to understand why folks think that the immediate results of an egg and a sperm uniting are a human being?

I don't. I really, really don't. I don't think abortion is a great idea, but emphatically think it should be legal, particularly in the first 4 months or so. Yes, 4.

But I'm interested in why people think it is a full-on human being. But reasons, not just assertions.

Wendy P.

Near as I can tell, like most issues of faith it comes down to politics.

Elevation of fertilized ova to "human" status is a recent concept. Until the turn of the 20th Century, terminating a pregnancy before the "quickening," or the point at which movement can be detected externally, was considered a non-event from the standpoint of most western religious authorities (the Vatican, Puritans, et al.).

By the end of the 20th Century, however, the issue had become rather muddied. "Partial birth" abortions, where part of delivery includes having the baby's brains being sucked out of its skull, were staunchly defended by "choice" advocates, while the "right to lifers" were trying to figure out how to make into a felony any failure of a fertilized ovum to survive to majority.

My guess is that your problem is the assumption that there is a lot of "thinking" going on here - the issue is one clouded with huge doses of emotion.

Though I think abortion is best avoided, I can think of all too many people whose optimal fate would have been to become biowaste in the first trimester. However, people with sufficient presence of mind to be aware of the ramifications of taking a pregnancy to term are not often those given to fetal alcohol syndrome, or the abuse or neglect of their offspring, so abortion does not serve as chlorine in the gene pool.

The subject is one where bad craziness lurks. Beware.


BSBD,

Winsor

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Pretty much once they can look you in the eye and express a clear thought.

Looking at their shoes and mumbling means they aren't quite there yet - and anytime prior for that matter.

Sounds like a lot of liberals I know

And they made it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,126]

Just to clarify, do you mean "heart beat established" in the traditional sense of quickening (i.e. when the mother can detect it), or when an ultrasound can detect it (about 6 weeks).

I do know your stance, I'm looking for people's reasons in this thread. And it's because I'm curious. The stance really does seem to have changed significantly over the years, becoming more and more polarized. Just like a lot of other things

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Just to clarify, do you mean "heart beat established" in the traditional sense of quickening (i.e. when the mother can detect it), or when an ultrasound can detect it (about 6 weeks).

I do know your stance, I'm looking for people's reasons in this thread. And it's because I'm curious. The stance really does seem to have changed significantly over the years, becoming more and more polarized. Just like a lot of other things

Wendy P.

Again I cant say when

but if it is moving that is good enough for me

And I will ask you Wendy, who gets to decide? And based on what?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,405]

>And I will ask you Wendy, who gets to decide?

The mother and her doctor (mainly the mother.) She will take the responsibility for the child, and will risk her health to bring it to term; she gets to make the call.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>And I will ask you Wendy, who gets to decide?

The mother and her doctor (mainly the mother.) She will take the responsibility for the child, and will risk her health to bring it to term; she gets to make the call.

That is not what I asked her

So just to help you out

Who gets to decide when the cell mass becomes more? When it is a human life and not before?

You?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,126]

I think that people get to decide, based on likely viability outside the womb. And they hope they get it right.

I really don't think that it's a person until fairly sophisticated brain waves are present, for all of the same reasons that we try to determine if there are fairly sophisticated brain waves present before removing artificial life support means.

If God planned for a baby to be born, it will be born; that's how God works. If people can mess with that plan, they can also mess with it by using birth control, or simply saying no. So I really don't go for the "God decides" route; I think that He gave us the tools to figure it out as best we could.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

I think that people get to decide, based on likely viability outside the womb. And they hope they get it right.

I really don't think that it's a person until fairly sophisticated brain waves are present, for all of the same reasons that we try to determine if there are fairly sophisticated brain waves present before removing artificial life support means.

If God planned for a baby to be born, it will be born; that's how God works. If people can mess with that plan, they can also mess with it by using birth control, or simply saying no. So I really don't go for the "God decides" route; I think that He gave us the tools to figure it out as best we could.

Wendy P.

I will agree he gives us the tools
He also gives us a mind to know whether using a tool in a manner is right or not

He gave us the the mind to develope and use a nuke bomb to follow the thought process correct?

He also gave us some rules and principals to base those decsions on

But in the end, as you state here, we get to pick how and when to use them.

So again I ask

Who gets to pick when that cell matter becomes a life?

(oh, and to all you anti God screamers reading this, I just followed the thought line established by Wendy. I am not advocation for or against a God)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,405]

>Who gets to decide when the cell mass becomes more? When it is a human life and
>not before? You?

Like I said - the mother. You can certainly have an opinion, but unless you're the one carrying the child, it doesn't mean all that much.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

>Who gets to decide when the cell mass becomes more? When it is a human life and
>not before? You?

Like I said - the mother. You can certainly have an opinion, but unless you're the one carrying the child, it doesn't mean all that much.

So the mother alone decides when the child mass she is carrying is a human life or not

So if she has it's life functions ended at the end of a full term pregnancy but before it takes a breath, you are ok with that?

(yes this is an extreme example but a real one today)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,126]

I'd put it at "people" and I defined how I qualify that. The people who are involved, and the people who advise those who make laws.

I think it's wrong to abort a baby at 9 months minus one day. I think it's perfectly all right to use an IUD for contraception, even if its function sometimes prevents implantation of a fertilized egg.

Personally, and for anyone I might talk to, the difference is a few weeks before the baby can survive outside the womb without incredibly heroic measures. That's a moving target these days, but for now the earliest viability is about 20 weeks (and that's with seriously compromised quality of life), so 16 weeks or so is a reasonable guess for me.

If we're wrong, well, then we're wrong. But we're people, with the tools and knowledge of people. 100-150 years ago, it wasn't a baby until the mother could feel its quickening -- that was around the same time, or even a little later.

In 300 years knowledge will have changed, and they'll look back on this time as being fairly ignorant about a lot of things (and not others).

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wmw999 2,126]

Quote

end of a full term pregnancy but before it takes a breath...yes this is an extreme example but a real one today

Where is it a real example?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

I'd put it at "people" and I defined how I qualify that. The people who are involved, and the people who advise those who make laws.

I think it's wrong to abort a baby at 9 months minus one day. I think it's perfectly all right to use an IUD for contraception, even if its function sometimes prevents implantation of a fertilized egg.

Personally, and for anyone I might talk to, the difference is a few weeks before the baby can survive outside the womb without incredibly heroic measures. That's a moving target these days, but for now the earliest viability is about 20 weeks (and that's with seriously compromised quality of life), so 16 weeks or so is a reasonable guess for me.

If we're wrong, well, then we're wrong. But we're people, with the tools and knowledge of people. 100-150 years ago, it wasn't a baby until the mother could feel its quickening -- that was around the same time, or even a little later.

In 300 years knowledge will have changed, and they'll look back on this time as being fairly ignorant about a lot of things (and not others).

Wendy P.

Interesting how the question can not really be answered isnt it

But we are not dealing in the future. We are dealing in today

Abortion lowers the value of life IMO

And we are heading that directin very fast these days

Where does it stop?

Studies have shown a baby can feel pain much earlier than your time lines of a pregnancy.

I can even begin to imagine inflicting that on what I think is a baby

No matter where that baby needs to be to survive

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

end of a full term pregnancy but before it takes a breath...yes this is an extreme example but a real one today

Where is it a real example?

Wendy P.

Late term abortions

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,126]

In 2003, 1.4% of abortions in the US were after 21 weeks of age (i.e. likely viability). That's a long, long time before "the day before a full-term birth."

Quote

In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year

(all the above brought to you courtesy of Wikipedia).

According to a study 10 years before that, yes, a piss-poor percentage of women had the abortion because they were trying to decide or something like that (that's not a great reason). I don't know of any more recent ones.

I'm going to suggest that in a population of 300,000,000 people (over 4 million births), that 1032 late-term abortions, while a shame, is not a large hit. Would it be better if more women died from illegal abortions than fetuses died because of legal ones? Would it be better if the babies were born and then raised by these women?

Trying to eliminate all instances of anything in this large a population is pretty difficult.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

Quote

In 2003, 1.4% of abortions in the US were after 21 weeks of age (i.e. likely viability). That's a long, long time before "the day before a full-term birth."

Quote

In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year

(all the above brought to you courtesy of Wikipedia).

According to a study 10 years before that, yes, a piss-poor percentage of women had the abortion because they were trying to decide or something like that (that's not a great reason). I don't know of any more recent ones.

I'm going to suggest that in a population of 300,000,000 people (over 4 million births), that 1032 late-term abortions, while a shame, is not a large hit. Would it be better if more women died from illegal abortions than fetuses died because of legal ones? Would it be better if the babies were born and then raised by these women?

Trying to eliminate all instances of anything in this large a population is pretty difficult.

Wendy P.

It is also a very racist practice

Quote

Centers for Disease Control

- Abortion kills more black Americans than seven leading causes of death combined.
- While 56 percent of all women who obtained legal abortions were white, the abortion rate (the number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44 per year) for black women was 2.9 times that of white women. For every thousand black women, 32 have abortions, as compared with 11 for every thousand white women.

Statistics from The Alan Guttmaucher Institute

- 37 percent of all abortions are performed on black women. Non-Hispanic white women, who make up a much larger portion of the population, had 34 percent of the total number of abortions performed.
- For every two African American women that get pregnant one will choose to abort.
- A Black baby is 5 times more likely to be killed in the womb than a White Baby.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,126]

It's only racist if people are the victims, not the choosers. Based on some other threads, birth control would seem to be a racist practice against white people.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)