Is a fetus human?

[Maponos]

OK so not all life is sacred but "the growth and change into a conscious being" that sacred?

In a way, the skin cell you were speaking of before could be sacred (such pieces of a body can be used in occult rituals, for example). In a way, the whole living world is sacred. However, I tend to place emphasis on the growth, change and (in a human's case) consciousness as being the most sacred in life.

 

[Curious George]

In a way, the skin cell you were speaking of before could be sacred (such pieces of a body can be used in occult rituals, for example). In a way, the whole living world is sacred. However, I tend to place emphasis on the growth, change and (in a human's case) consciousness as being the most sacred in life.

So you were equivocation earlier when you said human life is sacred?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Let's say I am planning to build a house. I buy a big stack of lumber and put it on a vacant lot. The wood catchs fire and burns up. Is it correct to say my house burned up? The wood may have had the potential to become a house when it was fully assembled but it was not a house when it was just a pile of wood. A fetus may have the potential to become a human but it is not a human until it is completely formed and born.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hi all! I'm just wondering what the general consensus of this forum is about whether or not a fetus is a human being. If your answer is no, please leave a reason or two as to why you answered the way you did. I'm especially interested in the explanations for why a fetus isn't human.

If you believe a fetus isn't human because the brain and other organs aren't fully developed, do you at least believe it is human after birth? So the day prior to birth was it not human?

The word fetus (plural fetuses) is from the Latin fētus (“offspring”, “bringing forth”, “hatching of young”).

Please vote. Thanks!

The soul or spirit of the individual comes into being with the conception of his physical body.
(Baha'i perspective)

 

[psychoslice]

We are only what we are because of our programming and conditioning and of course genetics, to me a fetus is like a clean slate with nothing written on it.

 

[Willamena]

The soul or spirit of the individual comes into being with the conception of his physical body.
(Baha'i perspective)

As an idealist, I cannot argue that.

 

[निताइ dasa]

I think a fetus is a human being, biologically. I do not think she is a person (a moral agent). But a fetus holds the inalienable rights of a person, (like right of life and autonomy) out of eventuality. (just like infants or coma patients).

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

So if we had the ability to manufacture humans instead of grow them, these would not be human beings that we manufactured?

If they were in every way indistinguishable from a human they would be human.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The soul or spirit of the individual comes into being with the conception of his physical body.
(Baha'i perspective)

That is the official position of many christian denominations.
However as a majority of fetuses are naturally aborted during the early days after conception it seems God has little concern that their souls are so soon returned.

 

[Dawnofhope]

That is the official position of many christian denominations.
However as a majority of fetuses are naturally aborted during the early days after conception it seems God has little concern that their souls are so soon returned.

About 10 - 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. I wonder what that's all about. Then again with medical science and better living conditions rates of infant and early childhood mortality and morbidity have plummeted.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

About 10 - 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. I wonder what that's all about. Then again with medical science and better living conditions rates of infant and early childhood mortality and morbidity have plummeted.

About 10 - 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. I wonder what that's all about. Then again with medical science and better living conditions rates of infant and early childhood mortality and morbidity have plummeted.

Actually that is not true, Most zygotes and embryos are aborted between conception, and before or soon after implantation ( first few days or weeks) usually long before pregnancy is known about or has been established.

 

[Maponos]

So you were equivocation earlier when you said human life is sacred?

No, I typically like to speak of simple things in simple terms.

 

[Revoltingest]

I voted <yes>, except in the case of both parents being lawyers.

 

[Shad]

Human, yes. A person, no.

A fetus is not an individual. It does not become an individual until the moment of birth. Until that point it does not have individual rights.

Given the above then according to you is it acceptable to kill a human even a second before birth? Yes?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Actually that is not true, Most zygotes and embryos are aborted between conception, and before or soon after implantation ( first few days or weeks) usually long before pregnancy is known about or has been established.

Here are citations from reputable medical websites that support 10 - 20% miscarriage rates:

Miscarriage

Estimating the probability of spontaneous abortion in the presence of induced abortion and vice versa.

Best Wishes

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Here are citations from reputable medical websites that support 10 - 20% miscarriage rates:

Miscarriage

Estimating the probability of spontaneous abortion in the presence of induced abortion and vice versa.

Best Wishes

This report from stanford uni, says differently

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101003205930.htm

 

[Curious George]

No, I typically like to speak of simple things in simple terms.

But you were talking about different levels of sacredness. In reality there is a hierarchy in your view. Thus a human cell is human life that is "in a way" sacred and the zygote is human life that is in another way sacred. But we are expected to treat these bits of human life differently because they are not the same sacredness. If this is "speaking of simple things in simple terms" then you were very much equivocating. Otherwise I have missed your point. What exactly do you mean when you say sacred then?

 

[Curious George]

Let's say I am planning to build a house. I buy a big stack of lumber and put it on a vacant lot. The wood catchs fire and burns up. Is it correct to say my house burned up? The wood may have had the potential to become a house when it was fully assembled but it was not a house when it was just a pile of wood. A fetus may have the potential to become a human but it is not a human until it is completely formed and born.

But isn't it also correct to call it just a stack of wood? That we can refer to things symbolically does not help the situation here. When asked whether it was an actual house or a stack of lumber the person should acquiesce that it was actually a stack of lumber.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

And the fetus is not yet a human. The lumber becomes a house when it is completely assembled and the fetus becomes a human when it is completely formed and born.

 

[Maponos]

But you were talking about different levels of sacredness. In reality there is a hierarchy in your view. Thus a human cell is human life that is "in a way" sacred and the zygote is human life that is in another way sacred. But we are expected to treat these bits of human life differently because they are not the same sacredness. If this is "speaking of simple things in simple terms" then you were very much equivocating. Otherwise I have missed your point. What exactly do you mean when you say sacred then?

My point is that a skin cell cannot (naturally) grow into a human.

The act of creation is sacred. Creating art, music, architecture; it's all sacred (though many modern examples of art are quite debatable).

Creating life is the most sacred form of creation. To terminate that form of creation is a desecration of the sacred.