When does a human being become human? At conception? After birth?
Shouldn’t this topic be in Great Debates?
No, after birth is completely different.
Mmm hehe um yah jack am coke, yah yah, vodka- Keith Richards
Thanks metroshane, gonna have to put up the jello now.
Well, shut my mouth. It’s also illegal to put squirrels down your pants for the purposes of gambling.
… so a priest, a pastor, and a rabbi are having a discussion about when life begins. The priest says, “Life begins at conception.” The pastor says, “Life begins at birth.” The rabbi says, “Life begins when the kids leave home and the dog dies.”
In most societies “life” is deemed to begin at birth.
For example, I don’t think that you could write a will and designate a fetus as your heir. You can’t get a social security number for a baby before it’s born. etc…
Most people only give a name to their child after the child is born.
When a baby dies before birth, most people say “I miscarried” and not “my baby died”. There wouldn’t be a memorial service/funeral after a miscarriage.
This is probably venturing into “Great Debates” territory.
J’ai assez vécu pour voir que différence engendre haine.
Stendhal
It’s a meaningless question as phrased. Referring to something that is alive as “human” or “not human” is semantic and categorical, occasionally political, but unless you define “human” first anyone else can have a different definition. (Were the Neanderthals human? The Australopithecines? The Homo Erecti? Defend your answer…).
If, as many prior posters seem to suspect, you are attempting a back-door method of asking under which circumstances abortion should be legal, available, and/or considered morally permissible, please be aware that not everyone who is pro-choice is pro-choice on the grounds that up until some certain point “it isn’t human”. (It is one of my pet peeves that I keep being baited on this “is it human” question when I never said it wasn’t!). I will add to the choir that is singing for the removal of this thread to Great Debates, although I’ll also note in passing the presence of a 3-page-deep debate on the abortion subject in (of all places) MPSIMS!
Designated Optional Signature at Bottom of Post
It hasn’t turned into a nasty debate just yet. Although the subject matter is a red flag waving in the wind.
Dr. Dean says he defines “life” to begin when something can support itself…as in doing it’s own breathing.
First Thursday after the first full moon after the Winter Solstice. Except on leap years not divisible by 400.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity
A human being is human, before, during and after birth. Oddly enough, it is human after death as well.
Human hair can be redily identified as such. Other tissue, blood, bone etc… is just as identifiable as human. Human remains are seldom mistaken for auto parts, so we can assume they remain human as well.
Recently there was a stir within the net, someone was selling human eggs! If what we saw on the news about Marv Albert is any indication, human sperm is identifiable as such as well.
So the answer to the OP is; Humans became human when our chromosone pairs mutated in such a way that we breed true. That is, we produced babies that were like ourselves (geneticly anyways).
Or from a creationist veiw, since the Allmighty put us here.
In most societies “life” is deemed to begin at birth.
Most societies have been ignorant of the mechanics of fertilization.
Most societies have not given certain infants or even adults the right to life. Infantcide, slavery (and the ability to kill your slaves with little or no repurcussion), and genocide have been cultural norms for longer than not.
So, should cultural norms be the deciding factor?
For example, I don’t think that you could write a will and designate a fetus as your heir. You can’t get a social security number for a baby before it’s born. etc…
These are situations that arise from the fact that the law doesn’t recognize fetuses with the rights of humans. If everyone decided the fetuses were human, then the laws would be rewritten to reflect that change. So, you’re saying they’re not human because the law doesn’t recognize them as human. However, the law allows you to leave money in a will for your non-human pet…
Most people only give a name to their child after the child is born.
Again, an argument from culture. And in this case, I think you’re just plain wrong. In my anecdotal experience, everyone I know who plans on ‘keeping’ the baby comes up with a name for the child before it’s born.
When a baby dies before birth, most people say “I miscarried” and not “my baby died”. There wouldn’t be a memorial service/funeral after a miscarriage.
You obviously haven’t seen the children’s section of a graveyard in which there are buried many ‘named’ miscarriages. Also, people say, “My dad’s no longer with us,” rather than “My dad died.” When it comes to death, people often use the circumlocution.
And yes, churches do hold services for miscarried babies if the parents ask. The Roman Catholic Church has services for all aborted children, even when it is not asked.
As to the poster who uses the viability test (the fetus can survive on its own – which is the Supreme Court test): then what about adult humans in comas who are on life support and who have a chance of recovery? They are not currently viable. Can we pull the plug even when their chances of recovery are over 90% (as is the chances of a fetus surviving full term)?
What about the day before viability? You can kill the fetus on that day, and yet, on the next day, you can’t. Does that make sense?
And yes, this is the pre-eminent abortion question – for some people, in the following way:
-
There are those who say the fetus is not human, and thus can be aborted.
-
There are those who say the fetus is human and thus can not be aborted.
-
There are those who try to name the point in which the fetus transitions from fetus to human, before that point, you can abort; after that point, you can not abort.
-
There are those who say it doesn’t matter whether the fetus is human or not, as long as the fetus is dependent on the woman’s body, the woman has the right to decide what happens to her body and can abort any time she chooses, even if the fetus is a human being.
Peace (see you all in GD).
Interesting post Moriah, except it ignores the OP.
Original question,
“When does a human being become human? At conception? After birth?”
Note the poster asks when a human being becomes human, not when human tissue becomes a human being.
It is likely your post responds to what the OP meant but mine actually adresses what was asked.
Oh yea, nah nah nah. (preparing for the inevitable direction of this thread)
What a great idea, Moriah – voting rights for the unborn. In Chicago, the dead have been voting for many years, why shouldn’t the not-yet-born also have that privilege?
Think of the millions of new voters we’d have! Think of the millions of new consumers! Ad campaigns, aimed at the unborn! The market potential is fantastic!!
moriah, you seem to think that I was trying to put forth an argument in favour of late-term abortions? Not true.
I was simply pointing out that in Western European culture, the legal system and most of society does not really recognize a “person” until it’s born. I am not trying to say that this perception reflects our modern knowledge of biology.
I am aware that if parents ask you can have a service for the miscarried child. But is that common? I was raised as a catholic and never remember attending such a service.
J’ai assez vécu pour voir que différence engendre haine.
Stendhal
So Dr. Adell thinks that personhood is conferred when the ‘something’ can live autonomously?
No baby can do that. All need a minimum of warmth and nutrition.
ARNOLD seems to think that life begins at birth. Ok, then why do surgeons sometimes do corrective surgery on the fetus? Why waste time on a dead fetus?
Clearly, the baby is living.
Like most “great debates,” there is no definitive answer.
I can only speak for myself. Before I had children, I had no problem with abortions, I supported a “woman’s right to choose.”
Then I got married, and we tried and tried to have children. After four years of testing and practicing and praying, it finally happened. And the moment my OB-GYN told me I was pregnant (I was four weeks along), there was no doubt there was a human inside me – our baby.
Now, with two beautiful children, I support a woman’s right to choose to use good sense, her right to choose to use contraception, her right to choose to take responsibility before things get to the point of having to consider an abortion.
This is not THE answer to the question;
but it is my answer to it.
Tammy
“May your song always be sung.”
No, I’m saying that our whole legal system, and many of the ways in which society treats unborn babies, shows a trend in considering life as beginning at birth.
J’ai assez vécu pour voir que différence engendre haine.
Stendhal
Pashley said:
No, that’s not what was said, and that was pretty clear. Doug had said, “Dr. Dean says he defines ‘life’ to begin when something can support itself…as in doing it’s own breathing.” Now which part of that equates to “live autonomously”? He specifically used the example of breathing – not eating or being warm.
If you’re going to argue a point, argue it. If you’re going to argue against somebody else, argue against what they actually said, not against a straw man that you set up just so you can knock it down.
DAVIDB said:
"No, that’s not what was said, and that was pretty clear. Doug had said, “Dr. Dean says he defines ‘life’ to begin when something can support itself…as in doing it’s own breathing.” Now which part of that equates to “live autonomously”? He specifically used the example of breathing – not eating or being warm. "
Ok, i stand corrected, I apologize.
Dr. Adell is still quite wrong though!
Let’s set this up correctly: His position is life begins when the baby can exist outside the womb…‘breath on it’s own’, without assistance, correct? Ok. So, if the baby is in the womb at 2pm, and out at 3pm (when, life begins, for Adell), then that means that the baby was without life at 2pm. But the baby is not dead, because to die, you have to live first, which he states it is not. So, unless life was suddenly bequeathed to the baby when it exited the vagina, the baby must be alive in the womb. It can’t be dead THEN alive, Or not exist, then have life and exist. It is alive in the womb. Things that are not alive don’t grow, and don’t need nutrition.