• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Life Begins at Conception

Status
Not open for further replies.

McBell

Unbound
Is there any biblical basis for the claim that life begins at conception?
After thinking about this and researching the Bible, it dawned on me that the Bible does not say anything about conception at all.

Now there are those who will take the conclusion that life begins at conception and twist verses around to "support" their conclusion.
However, the fact is that back when the Bible was written, it was believed that the man planted a "seed" in the woman. That the woman was nothing more than an incubator.

They had no idea/knowledge of conception, especially as we know it now a days.
 

McBell

Unbound
I thought it was clearly implied by "1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law" :confused:
OK.
i will concede to the just/unjust.
However, I still hold that sapient is not a requirement.
However, I will allow that your definition of 'sapient' and mine may differ:
sa·pi·ent
adj.

Having great wisdom and discernment.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Seems to me that even killing the stupidest person in cold blood is considered murder...


Now for the word sentient...
sen·tient
adj.
1. Having sense perception; conscious: "The living knew themselves just sentient puppets on God's stage" T.E. Lawrence.

2. Experiencing sensation or feeling.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton
Seems that I can go into a hospital and gun down all patients in a coma and it not, by your given definition, be murder...
 

McBell

Unbound
Alright, but by sapience/sentience I meant a conscious, self-aware, thinking and feeling life form.
so how do you distinguish the various stages of life?
In the context of the discussion coma patients, based upon your given definition, cannot be murdered.

If you are to apply your definition to embryos and fetuses then it would equally apply to coma patients, right?
Seems to me it would.
 

Circle_One

Well-Known Member
I love how people pro-lifers always cry out "Oh, the rights of the baby, the rights of the baby" etc, etc. But if everyone really cared so much about rights, rather than shoving their ignorant, holier than though bigotry down everyone else's throat, then where, is Isis' name, are the rights of the mother?

She decides she wants to have an abortion and suddenly she is no longer human and therefore no longer has any rights?
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
Just like a tumor, or a toe.

Yeah, yeah. The difference of course is that when the plumbing works, the zygote becomes an adult human. Frankly, the zygote is merely a different stage of growth for a human being. There's no particular reason to consider a twelve-year-old child more "human" or more "viable" than a zygote. There is little to distinguish them morally. Why does a 12-year-old child have human rights? Because she's human. Same for the zygote.
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
They are both mindless single cell organisms. It lacks humanity without mind and emotion.

Just like the elderly with severe dementia and Altzheimer's disease.

The morally important distinction to be made between a zygote and a bacterium is that the zygote, when functioning properly, grows into an adult human.
 

Dunemeister

Well-Known Member
I love how people pro-lifers always cry out "Oh, the rights of the baby, the rights of the baby" etc, etc. But if everyone really cared so much about rights, rather than shoving their ignorant, holier than though bigotry down everyone else's throat, then where, is Isis' name, are the rights of the mother?

She decides she wants to have an abortion and suddenly she is no longer human and therefore no longer has any rights?

It's not about giving all the rights to one and none to the other. The question is one of balance.

The biggest problem with this whole debate is that everyone talks about rights, but no one talks about needs and responsibilities.
 

McBell

Unbound
Yeah, yeah. The difference of course is that when the plumbing works, the zygote becomes an adult human. Frankly, the zygote is merely a different stage of growth for a human being. There's no particular reason to consider a twelve-year-old child more "human" or more "viable" than a zygote. There is little to distinguish them morally. Why does a 12-year-old child have human rights? Because she's human. Same for the zygote.
Nice equivocation argument.
However, it is hardly convincing.
 

Circle_One

Well-Known Member
It's not about giving all the rights to one and none to the other. The question is one of balance.

The biggest problem with this whole debate is that everyone talks about rights, but no one talks about needs and responsibilities.

Exactly, and people need to mind their own business and take care of their own responsibilitites, rather than constantly sticking their noses where they don't belong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top