• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does life biologically begin at conception?

Does a new person's life "biologically" begin at conception?

  • Total voters
    72
Tsunami said:
I got no facts wrong. You admit this yourself. I have no bias or assumptions, I was simply answering the question. I can't help it if you don't like the biology of the answer.
Click to expand...

Your claim that individuality begins at gastrulation is biologically false.

When one "individual" splits and becomes two individuals,... You take that to mean that the original 'individual' never was. When in fact, the vast majority of 'individuals' never split, never create a twin and were therefore one and the same individual even before gastrulation that are there-after.

Tsunami said:
PS unless a girl at puberty can clone herself you're not getting my point.
Click to expand...

As it is with your example (pre-gastrulation),... a girl (one individual) after reaching puberty,... has the ability to 'conceive' or 'create' another (2nd individual(s)

So, using your logic about pre-gastrulation zygotes,.. a girl having reached puberty,... stops being a human individual,.... because at the point of pregnancy,... she MIGHT become two or more.

Caprice?

(misspelled intentionally)
 
"life" biologically begins at conception. This "life" isn't a homo sapien until it is capable of being self-sustaining and cognitive thought. Until then it only has the potential of being a homo sapien.
 
Gibberish said:
"life" biologically begins at conception. This "life" isn't a homo sapien until it is capable of being self-sustaining and cognitive thought. Until then it only has the potential of being a homo sapien.
Click to expand...

So,... Human's reproduce by way of metamorphosis,...like frogs and butterflies do?

We "morph" out of one organism that is not a 'homo-sapien' and into one which is?

You should report your findings to the scientific, medical and legal communities immediately!
 
Chuz Life said:
Your claim that individuality begins at gastrulation is biologically false.

When one "individual" splits and becomes two individuals,... You take that to mean that the original 'individual' never was. When in fact, the vast majority of 'individuals' never split, never create a twin and were therefore one and the same individual even before gastrulation that are there-after.



As it is with your example (pre-gastrulation),... a girl (one individual) after reaching puberty,... has the ability to 'conceive' or 'create' another (2nd individual(s)

So, using your logic about pre-gastrulation zygotes,.. a girl having reached puberty,... stops being a human individual,.... because at the point of pregnancy,... she MIGHT become two or more.

Caprice?

(misspelled intentionally)
Click to expand...
When a zygote splits itself it isn't making another individual. They are genetically identical. It is free to split again or combine back into one, until gastrulation. The fact that it might not happen in every case doesn't change how the process works. And women cannot do this, so end that foolish argument.

Chuz Life said:
So,... Human's reproduce by way of metamorphosis,...like frogs and butterflies do?

We "morph" out of one organism that is not a 'homo-sapien' and into one which is?

You should report your findings to the scientific, medical and legal communities immediately!
Click to expand...

Frogs and butterflies do not reproduce by metamorphosis. They do it pretty much the same way we do. The metamorphosis is just an extreme version of puberty.

PS, Homo Sapiens means "wise man". If it cannot think, is it a homo sapiens?

132953303_dd185ca084.jpg

IMG_2697_600w_butterfly_sex.jpg
 
Last edited:
Tsunami said:
When a zygote splits itself it isn't making another individual. They are genetically identical.
Click to expand...

:stop:

First of all not even the most similar 'identical twins' are absolutely (genetically) identical.

Secondly your use of the phrase "another individual" tells me that you do know (on some level) that the original zygote (for whatever mammal it is) is an 'individual' as well.

Tsunami said:
It is free to split again or combine back into one, until gastrulation. The fact that it might not happen in every case doesn't change how the process works. And women cannot do this, so end that foolish argument.
Click to expand...

You are shooting holes in your own argument, Tsu.... not mine.

You are trying to make the case that a zygote splitting into two individuals is proof that a single zygote is not an individual.

Yet, when I point out that a pregnant woman then (by your logic) is not an individual for the reason that she too could create another individual,.... You cry foul because in that case,... the new individual created would not be considered 'identical' to herself.

News for you,.. identical twins are not absolutely identical.

Tsunami said:
Frogs and butterflies do not reproduce by metamorphosis. They do it pretty much the same way we do. The metamorphosis is just an extreme version of puberty.
Click to expand...

Why do you work so hard at missing a point made?
 
Chuz Life said:
:stop:

First of all not even the most similar 'identical twins' are absolutely (genetically) identical.
Click to expand...
They are at the zygote stage.

Why do you work so hard at missing a point made?
Click to expand...

You were making fun of someone's scientific understanding using your own lack of scientific understanding.
 
Chuz Life said:
So,... Human's reproduce by way of metamorphosis,...like frogs and butterflies do?

We "morph" out of one organism that is not a 'homo-sapien' and into one which is?

You should report your findings to the scientific, medical and legal communities immediately!
Click to expand...

We do not reproduce by way of metamorphosis, as we only grow and do not go through abrupt changes after birth, but our seeds & eggs do join to create a zygote that evolves dramatically within a sack carried by a host to embryo to fetus to baby.

As I said. "life" biologically starts at conception. The question is when is the biological life form consider a human being? What are the traits that defines something as human? Is it DNA? My finger has DNA, is my finger a human? Is it anything that has the possibility to become human? That question in itself states that the "thing" isn't human yet.
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
The question is when is the biological life form consider a human being? What are the traits that defines something as human? Is it DNA? My finger has DNA, is my finger a human? Is it anything that has the possibility to become human? That question in itself states that the "thing" isn't human yet.
Click to expand...

Good gawd,.. here we go again,... Have you even attempted to answer any of these questions for yourself?

You remind me that I really need to complete my website.
 
Chuz Life said:
Good gawd,.. here we go again,... Have you even attempted to answer any of these questions for yourself?

You remind me that I really need to complete my website.
Click to expand...
Let me know when you want to contribute any substance to this discussion.
 
I want you both to contribute substance to the discussion. ;)
 
Tsunami said:
I want you both to contribute substance to the discussion. ;)
Click to expand...

Define substance,.... substance has existed for millions if not billions of years,... when you contribute one portion and someone else contributes another portion,... is new substance created or conceived? Or is it just 'potential' substance as no-one has really examined it yet and so it's not viable substance (if a tree falls,....) And,... since it's my right to believe it's substance,.... even if you don't,.... don't I have the right to abort that substantive (non viable) substance,.... and....

Sound ridiculous?

Imagine that.
 
Tsunami said:
I want you both to contribute substance to the discussion. ;)
Click to expand...

I asked specific questions on exactly what stage an embryo/zygote/fetus is considered to be Human and what qualifies it for that title.

The response to my questions was "I need to build my website". :roll:
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
We do not reproduce by way of metamorphosis, as we only grow and do not go through abrupt changes after birth, but our seeds & eggs do join to create a zygote that evolves dramatically within a sack carried by a host to embryo to fetus to baby.

As I said. "life" biologically starts at conception. The question is when is the biological life form consider a human being? What are the traits that defines something as human? Is it DNA? My finger has DNA, is my finger a human? Is it anything that has the possibility to become human? That question in itself states that the "thing" isn't human yet.
Click to expand...

Biologically, that zygote is considered human from the moment of conception.

No, your finger doesn't serve the same function as a reproductive zygote, and hence your strawman doesn't matter.
 
Gibberish said:
"life" biologically begins at conception. This "life" isn't a homo sapien until it is capable of being self-sustaining and cognitive thought. Until then it only has the potential of being a homo sapien.
Click to expand...

Really?

That's what the medical books say, that comatose patients with no expected recovery aren't members of the species homo sapiens?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Biologically, that zygote is considered human from the moment of conception.
Click to expand...

Yup, it is indeed human because it carries a human genetic structure. Your fingernails are human too, so is your blood, so is your appendix, so are lots of things you shed or can get rid of through surgical means and be none the worse for wear. But just being human doesn't mean it's automatically protected by law.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Really?

That's what the medical books say, that comatose patients with no expected recovery aren't members of the species homo sapiens?
Click to expand...


If there brains are functioning and they are capable of cognitive though through conscious or unconscious levels then they are Homo Sapiens. If not, they are Dead Homo Sapiens.

There isn't enough scientific methods to determine if a comatose patient is living or dead. Over the years many comatose patients thought to be lost causes have successfully recovered.

A Zygote, on the other hand has no chance of gaining cognitive thought until it biologically evolves into an embryo and then a fetus. The Fetus is the only stage where the you can say it is a human and not just the potential of being human.
 
Gibberish said:
A Zygote, on the other hand has no chance of gaining cognitive thought until it biologically evolves into an embryo and then a fetus. The Fetus is the only stage where the you can say it is a human and not just the potential of being human.
Click to expand...

This (above) is unsupported wishful thinking.

Brain function is not a requirement for "personhood."
 
Last edited:
Chuz Life said:
This (above) is unsupported wishful thinking.

Brain function is not a requirement for "personhood."
Click to expand...

It is in my opinion, which is supported by the law and by all of the biological, ethical, and semantic arguments I have posted.
 
Last edited:
Tsunami said:
It is in my opinion, which is supported by the law and by all of the biological, ethical, and semantic arguments I have posted.
Click to expand...

The absense of any links to cites or references to support this claim (of yours) is hereby noted.
 
Last edited:
Chuz Life said:
This (above) is unsupported wishful thinking.

Brain function is not a requirement for "personhood."
Click to expand...

Un supported wishful thinking? How many Zygotes do you know that have developed into functional humans outside of the womb?
 
Last edited:
Chuz Life said:
This (above) is unsupported wishful thinking.

Brain function is not a requirement for "personhood."
Click to expand...

Its scientifically confirmed that a zygote and 1st and 2nd trimester fetus do NOT possess the necessary biological equipment thought or consciousness.

Thus, a functioning brain IS a necessary pre-requisite for "personhood".

Do you have any evidence to present that cognitive abilities do not require a developed/undamaged brain? If not then there is no need to entertain your speculation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom