Question for Religious Anti-Choicers: “When Does Human Life End?”

[crowonsnow]

Originally Posted by Ender

The issue of abortion is utterly independent of the question of the soul and it is not only easy to separate them there is no reason whatever to join them. We can see by how this thread has gone: the question about when ensoulment occurs is a constant distraction from the real issue of what is being destroyed in an abortion. Are we killing human beings? The answer to that question has nothing whatever to do with when a human gains his soul or whether a soul even exists. Those who oppose abortion would do well to stay focused and not get drawn into debates that allow attention to shift away from the nature of the embryo (fetus, blastula, ...). I'm pretty sure that no one is going to admit that we are indeed killing humans but that it's ok to do it because they have not yet received a soul.

One of the major points of the discussion, and I think one on which we all agree, is that being human doesn’t equate with being a human.

In my humble opinion I’d say you’re trying to have your cake and eat it too. You’re not saying that human life is sacred, but you are saying that a human life is sacred.

You’re also saying that a sperm and egg aren’t sacred but that the resulting single cell is sacred. That’s really the issue as I see it.

[Mary Gail 36]

Originally Posted by crowonsnow

You are saying that when the sperm and egg are completely joined, a soul is now present? So are you basing ensoulment on scientific knowledge?

I ask because we didn’t have this knowledge at one time, believing instead that male sperm was simply impregnated and then grew.

Would you agree with me that the issue of souls and abortion are not easily or readily separated?

Scientifically, sperm and egg join, then a new organism begins life.(I think we agree?) I believe the soul is created then, that would be my religious belief. (I think we disagree?)

No, I don't agree that the issue of abortion and souls are not easily or readily separated.

I don't know if a dog has a soul.....but when I see one scamper by, I know it's alive. Most people would call a person cruel who mistreated a dog.

My own personal experience is that I was a lukewarm Catholic, thinking that being "pro-choice" was fine. Then I learned about embryonic development. I became more and more pro-life, and then tried to become a better Catholic.

My bottom line, the embryo is human, although much smaller, less developed, much more fragile. Nature protects that life within the mother. It isn't any one's right to destroy that life, because it is human.

[Ender]

Originally Posted by crowonsnow

One of the major points of the discussion, and I think one on which we all agree, is that being human doesn’t equate with being a human.

Hypothesizing a difference between a human life form and a human being is indeed the only argument left to those who support abortion given that, scientifically, human life begins at fertilization.

In my humble opinion I’d say you’re trying to have your cake and eat it too. You’re not saying that human life is sacred, but you are saying that a human life is sacred.

I have made no religious argument whatever, not even the claim that human life is sacred. My arguments have been entirely scientific. You are the one trying to make a distinction between human life and a human being and addressing this point is why I have objected to any discussion about a soul as a distraction.

Make your case that a human life in its early forms is not a human being.

You’re also saying that a sperm and egg aren’t sacred but that the resulting single cell is sacred. That’s really the issue as I see it.

No. I am simply explaining that, scientifically, neither a sperm nor an egg is a unique human life but that a fertilized egg is. Let's leave "sacred" out of it.

Ender

[crowonsnow]

Originally Posted by Ender

Hypothesizing a difference between a human life form and a human being is indeed the only argument left to those who support abortion given that, scientifically, human life begins at fertilization.

Being human does not equate with being a human, which is a point you are unwilling to concede because it leaves open the possibility that the single human cell at fertilization is not a human.

And I can appreciate your reluctance, which I can only see as based upon religious ideology. After all, even our brains are human, but a human brain isn’t a human.

[crowonsnow]

Originally Posted by Mary Gail 36

Scientifically, sperm and egg join, then a new organism begins life.(I think we agree?) I believe the soul is created then, that would be my religious belief. (I think we disagree?)

No, I don't agree that the issue of abortion and souls are not easily or readily separated.

I don't know if a dog has a soul.....but when I see one scamper by, I know it's alive. Most people would call a person cruel who mistreated a dog.

Then you would have no problem believing we have no soul?

[Ender]

Originally Posted by crowonsnow

Being human does not equate with being a human, which is a point you are unwilling to concede because it leaves open the possibility that the single human cell at fertilization is not a human.

Why would I concede the point when you haven't presented an argument as to why your position should be accepted? You simply assert that it is true. I'll ask again: make a case as to why anyone should accept your assertion as valid.

And I can appreciate your reluctance, which I can only see as based upon religious ideology. After all, even our brains are human, but a human brain isn’t a human.

I don't know how to be more clear: I explained very specifically in my last post that my position has been based entirely on the science involved. I keep saying "Let's discuss this scientifically!"; how does that make me a religious ideologue?

Ender

[Mary Gail 36]

Originally Posted by crowonsnow

Then you would have no problem believing we have no soul?

From a scientific point of view, belief in a soul is "optional". The life of a new organism begins at conception. So a puppy started its life at conception, a kitten at its conception, a human at its conception. All of these organisms are alive. I don't know if dogs and cats have souls. I believe that humans have souls.

I am guessing that you don't believe in souls.....but I'm pretty sure you know that you are alive, as is the dog or cat.

I believe and know we have souls. You might not. We are both alive.