Random Conversation 2.0

Thank you and may i add

http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

Life Begins at Fertilization
The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:



"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]


"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]


"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]


"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]


"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]


"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]


"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]


"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]


"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]


"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]


"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]


"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]


"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]


"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]


"[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization....
"[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo....
"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.
"The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'"
[Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]
--------------;------------------

They act as though scientist are immune to bias

Sure they are.
I think people tend to imesh a woman's desire or right to choose, with that of when life begins. Two different things. Social acceptance -or society's determination tell you it's when a baby is born and breathing on its own, but it's not scientifically when life begins. Abortion laws are based on the Social concerns, even then, laws recognize after 24 weeks it's a viable baby and abortions becomes illegal... Regardless, if you want to argue using science and say "for a fact science proves life doesn't begin in the womb" there are science text definitions that refute that.
 
I apologize for not qualifying my statement, but I agreed with Raider, which means, if a baby is born premature and needs assistance to survive, I am still of the assumption that it is life. Thus, I would NOT advocate for abortion.

Understood???

Im sorry but to me life begins when a new cell is produced. That is extremely scientific and other scientist agree.
The problem i have is eith raider and fg is that they really dont know when life begin when real questions come up and then they want to arbritrarily move the definition of life to fit a warm and fuzzy feeling or their agenda.

Homie dont play that.
 
Now dont get mad...u were playing around too. Now so just keep it mackish.

Now were u saying science this and that. Now its opinion

Come on now. U are changing the rules

GL don't try to get smart because I'm being as polite as possible with you. I'm not "caught" in shit. You asked when it's life and I gave you my opinion. If you want the scientific communities opinion, Google it.

Once again, you aren't getting what I'm saying because you keep coming back with your own twisted version of my words. I'm saying I consider life to be the moment that pregnancy can survive outside the womb. I didn't say life begins once they're physically born.



Me too. I think some states have legalized abortions to 28 weeks. Even late term abortions in CA (24 wk max) tug at my heart. I do firmy believe in a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices though.
 
My point has really about people having agendas and really dont know when life begins. We can guess but do we really know.

Scientist dont know. They are guessing and they too flip flop. Im not against planned patenthood but dont bullshit me.


Sure they are.
I think people tend to imesh a woman's desire or right to choose, with that of when life begins. Two different things. Social acceptance -or society's determination tell you it's when a baby is born and breathing on its own, but it's not scientifically when life begins. Abortion laws are based on the Social concerns, even then, laws recognize after 24 weeks it's a viable baby and abortions becomes illegal... Regardless, if you want to argue using science and say "for a fact science proves life doesn't begin in the womb" there are science text definitions that refute that.
 
Im sorry but to me life begins when a new cell is produced. That is extremely scientific and other scientist agree.
The problem i have is eith raider and fg is that they really dont know when life begin when real questions come up and then they want to arbritrarily move the definition of life to fit a warm and fuzzy feeling or their agenda.

Homie dont play that.

Very smart GL. Claim that your opinion is scientifically just, yet refuse to listen to an actual scientist tell you the facts lol. Like FG told you 10 posts ago, believe whatever you want just don't claim science as your reasoning.

Now dont get mad...u were playing around too. Now so just keep it mackish.

Now were u saying science this and that. Now its opinion

Come on now. U are changing the rules

I don't even know what the first part of that post means but I'll address the latter half. I'm not changing any rules. I'm sure science defines a life around the embryo stage but that's not my personal opinion. See, what you're incapable of doing is separating opinion from fact. If the scientific community decides that life begins when the pregnancy reaches the embryonic stage, that would be a fact. It wouldn't be my belief, but it would still be fact.
 
Im sorry but to me life begins when a new cell is produced. That is extremely scientific and other scientist agree.
The problem i have is eith raider and fg is that they really dont know when life begin when real questions come up and then they want to arbritrarily move the definition of life to fit a warm and fuzzy feeling or their agenda.

Homie dont play that.

It's funny, growing up, anytime we celebrated a birthday in my family or with friends, we would all say the age and my mother would always interrupt and say, "no, you're __ and 9 months"
And we would constantly have this argument with her that you are "born" on the day you were born and she would always say, "no, you're born in the womb- that is the beginning of your life".
My mother wasn't a deeply religious person, she just understood the scientific reality of when life begins. (which l now understand)
 
I did listen u guys believe thst life doesnt begin until it survive on its own. You guys said that it was scientifically proven. You guys kept saying science science science.

I used science too. I even quoted other scientist.

You tried to disregard cause you believe my pov was of religous belief. I never mentioned my religion. So were u really listening or were u going on agenda.

I asked specific question and u changed when life began. Summarized.

Dont write off peoples position just cause , especially when they are using the logic you the scientific world put out.

You the scientific world said cells are life....not me. The scientific world made that declaration.


Embyo stage thats fine but dcience also call cells life organisms too so lets acknowlge that.
Very smart GL. Claim that your opinion is scientifically just, yet refuse to listen to an actual scientist tell you the facts lol. Like FG told you 10 posts ago, believe whatever you want just don't claim science as your reasoning.



I don't even know what the first part of that post means but I'll address the latter half. I'm not changing any rules. I'm sure science defines a life around the embryo stage but that's not my personal opinion. See, what you're incapable of doing is separating opinion from fact. If the scientific community decides that life begins when the pregnancy reaches the embryonic stage, that would be a fact. It wouldn't be my belief, but it would still be fact.
 
Last edited:
They taught cells uniting creates new life even in college. Now that we are questioning tgem on it they flip flop.

Im not a religous person. I follow god and ect...im also a liberal but im not going to buy every dsrn thing
Liberal tell me. I listen then i decide.. im my own man.
Now if if u go abortion willy nilly be aware of the chances of not being able to have kids.
It's funny, growing up, anytime we celebrated a birthday in my family or with friends, we would all say the age and my mother would always interrupt and say, "no, you're __ and 9 months"
And we would constantly have this argument with her that you are "born" on the day you were born and she would always say, "no, you're born in the womb- that is the beginning of your life".
My mother wasn't a deeply religious person, she just understood the scientific reality of when life begins. (which l now understand)
 
I did listen u guys believe thst life doesnt begin until it survive on its own. You guys said that it was scientifically proven. You guys kept saying science science science.

I used science too. I even quoted other scientist.

You tried to disregard cause you believe my pov was of religous belief. I never mentioned my religion. So were u really listening or were u going on agenda.

I asked specific question and u changed when life began. Summarized.

Dont write off peoples position just cause , especially when they are using the logic you the scientific world put out.

You the scientific world said cells are life....not me. The scientific world made that declaration.

GL we'll just have to agree to disagree. So much of what you claim in your post didn't even happen or wasn't even said. It was how you perceived it. I ask you to research things further before going off on tangents, it'll help in the long run. You speak of agendas but taking PP as an example, very lucrative company...but just 3% of their services are abortion related. Where's the agenda when their money maker isn't actually abortion? You and I will never see eye to eye on this topic because we interpret fact and beliefs differently. It is what it is. You know I still dig u
 
Ooooo mmmmm ggggg. GL you've been explained the FACTS a million times and you're still trying to argue it. Believe what you want about when "life" begins but it'll never change the scientifically proven facts. You have every right to disagree with ending a pregnancy but you look silly trying to refute what's already been proven as fact.

Cells uniting doesn't mean life exists!!! That sir, is a fact. Refusing facts just because you don't believe them doesn't minimize their truth!

I just can't anymore with you lol. I just can't :rolleyes:

Give me a break. Now u are contradicting science again

Says the man who thinks life starts at the meeting egg and sperm :smt023
The facts show it's not what GL thinks, it's what Science thinks as fact - science text defines its at conception. I always thought, like you, that it begins outside the womb, but science tells us we were wrong...so not sure why you and FG are insisting science 'refutes him.
 
They taught cells uniting creates new life even in college. Now that we are questioning tgem on it they flip flop.

Im not a religous person. I follow god and ect...im also a liberal but im not going to buy every dsrn thing
Liberal tell me. I listen then i decide.. im my own man.
Now if if u go abortion willy nilly be aware of the chances of not being able to have kids.

I think the greatest disservice done to pregnant women (beause let's face it, abortion isn't really discussed in depth In high school, if at all) ...is that those seeking it are not really informed. I would like to see greater education given to those seeking one, on what truly is happening, will happen, and the psychological impact abortions can wreak on the woman.

I dont feel the 24 hr notice is sufficient, particularly because It's more often treated as a formality, rather than a sincere attempt to help the mother make an informed decision. A decision that can greatly, hugely impact the rest of her life.
 
Trust me i understand. Its like asking which came first...the chicken or the egg.

The biggest problem i have is if i say life begins at conception then labels come out. Ami a prolifer? Its a matter of timing. Im not for the death penalty but the movie theater killer can get the switch twice. I aint playing. Overall no. To many innocent people been found on death row. Why im bringing that up cause prolifers are sometimes ate hypocrites.

Just like scientist. They will sayvlife stsrts here then u ask them questions then they flip on you and u figure out they dont know.

Example u said when they can durvive on their own except when they are premmies. Well they are surviving on incubators (man made) Mothers are natural incubators....so whats the real difference.



GL we'll just have to agree to disagree. So much of what you claim in your post didn't even happen or wasn't even said. It was how you perceived it. I ask you to research things further before going off on tangents, it'll help in the long run. You speak of agendas but taking PP as an example, very lucrative company...but just 3% of their services are abortion related. Where's the agenda when their money maker isn't actually abortion? You and I will never see eye to eye on this topic because we interpret fact and beliefs differently. It is what it is. You know I still dig u
 
The facts show it's not what GL thinks, it's what Science thinks as fact - science text defines its at conception. I always thought, like you, that it begins outside the womb, but science tells us we were wrong...so not sure why you and FG are insisting science 'refutes him.

But even by the info you posted, science describes life as "animate existence, characterized by growth, reproduction, metabolism, and response to stimuli". I think there are even a few more characteristics required to define life but going off of just the four quoted above, zygotes don't meet the scientific criteria for life. Embryos are more likely to meet those criteria. I define life differently than science does as well, so I can appreciate goodloves stance here, I just don't agree that zygotes meet the criteria for life.
 
I think planned parenthood organization need to be in high schools

I think the greatest disservice done to pregnant women (beause let's face it, abortion isn't really discussed in depth In high school, if at all) ...is that those seeking it are not really informed. I would like to see greater education given to those seeking one, on what truly is happening, will happen, and the psychological impact abortions can wreak on the woman.

I dont feel the 24 hr notice is sufficient, particularly because It's more often treated as a formality, rather than a sincere attempt to help the mother make an informed decision. A decision that can greatly, hugely impact the rest of her life.
 
Im far from qualified but more questions need to be asked and i would like to see these cells transform myself.

But even by the info you posted, science describes life as "animate existence, characterized by growth, reproduction, metabolism, and response to stimuli". I think there are even a few more characteristics required to define life but going off of just the four quoted above, zygotes don't meet the scientific criteria for life. Embryos are more likely to meet those criteria. I define life differently than science does as well, so I can appreciate goodloves stance here, I just don't agree that zygotes meet the criteria for life.
 
I think the greatest disservice done to pregnant women (beause let's face it, abortion isn't really discussed in depth In high school, if at all) ...is that those seeking it are not really informed. I would like to see greater education given to those seeking one, on what truly is happening, will happen, and the psychological impact abortions can wreak on the woman.

I dont feel the 24 hr notice is sufficient, particularly because It's more often treated as a formality, rather than a sincere attempt to help the mother make an informed decision. A decision that can greatly, hugely impact the rest of her life.

This is why its so important for women to research not only their options but the facility in which they're going to. If the facility treats you like you're part of some cattle call, run. Women need to understand all their options and all the facts before making a permanent decision like abortion. When I have a pt crying on the table, I take her to another room and speak privately with her. I piss off many physicians doing this because Im putting a kink in their flow but imo...fuck their flow. This is a forever choice and I won't be a part of anything the pt isn't 100% on. Just like an medical care, research research and research more.
 
Trust me i understand. Its like asking which came first...the chicken or the egg.

The biggest problem i have is if i say life begins at conception then labels come out. Ami a prolifer? Its a matter of timing. Im not for the death penalty but the movie theater killer can get the switch twice. I aint playing. Overall no. To many innocent people been found on death row. Why im bringing that up cause prolifers are sometimes ate hypocrites.

Just like scientist. They will sayvlife stsrts here then u ask them questions then they flip on you and u figure out they dont know.

Example u said when they can durvive on their own except when they are premmies. Well they are surviving on incubators (man made) Mothers are natural incubators....so whats the real difference.

Mothers are incubators but an ega of 16 weeks isn't a life imo because even with medical assistance they won't survive outside mom. The best chance they have is to make it to 24 wks. There's only so much medicine can do. Just like a 12 wk ega doesn't have a chance of survival outsude mom...so to me I don't consider it a life. I believe science defines life around the embryonic stage, which I personally don't agree with. I don't discount it as fact, I just believe differently.
 
So you really dont want to answer a scientific question and that is What is the primary need for sex?

I can tell u why you dont want to answer the question. It would put u in the corner of being dcientific and say to reproduce. Which means wha
?

It means to produce another living organism.

Thank you for proving my point that scientist are doing things based on agenda.

gL, chill, right now you are being arrogant
I have work to do. I don't hang in here every minute to answer your questions. That the primary point of sex is reproduction has nothing to do with if two cells coming together instantlyn equals a living creature, I mean seriously? How do you think there?

To both Bliss and you, STILL no science exists proving there is life at the conception. All you all did was post a bunch of definitons that has nothing to do with the question at all

Science say that life is something , like LL said respond to stimuli, that does not necessarily mean a brain, we have simple organisms with one neuron that we regard as life. Scientifically, you have to have stilmuli response in order to be recognized as a life. Any discussions beyond that, is philosophy, ethics, etc. I dont get what is so bad with that.

Science can not record a stimuli response in a zygote, because it doesn't exist, its not there and as science only deals with facts. Now, there are a lot of debate when that life should be recognized, but ts not science, some of you really miss what science actually is and how its defined and when it stops being science

I'm tapping out, this is rexhausting
 
Back
Top Bottom