When does an embryo/zygote become a human being?

[BIG Sean]

In your opinion, at what point does an embryo/zygote become a human being?

Thanks,

[Bunny]

1. Why don't you give us your opinion first?

[uppityperson]

2. What do you think? Ah, search is my friend.

when do you think?

[dorkulon]

3. When it graduates high school. (nt)

[Cleita]

4. When it no longer needs it's mother to survive outside the womb.

Up until then it's really a parasite with human cells and the potential to become a human being. I wish I knew a less disturbing word than parasite, but essentially that's what it is.

[maddiejoan]

14. symbiote

[Cleita]

15. Thanks. That sounds better.n/t

[wickerwoman]

72. Except the mother really doesn't benefit from the relationship.

On the contrary, she gets higher blood pressure, pressure on her bladder and lungs, a larger heart and a curved spine. Nutrients are sucked out of her bloodstream. She gets kicked all night and pukes all day. To be a truly symbiotic relationship the mother would have to derive an advantage from it. The only one I can see is forty years later, the kids *might* not put in her in a home.

[kestrel91316]

24. Correct. Thank you.

[bleedingheart]

54. they never stop being parasitic....this according to my sister

who has two in college and one at home...

;-)

the only good thing at that age is that they aren't pressing on your bladder and giving you hemorrhoids .....bwahahahaha

[Cleita]

56. LOL. My husband used to say the same thing in a different way.

He said they never go away even when they move out. They are always there wanting something from you.

[niyad]

5. astrologically speaking, after the first saturn return (age 28-29)

[bowens43]

6. When it passes it's SATs?

[BlueEyedSon]

21. Close, MEDICAL SCHOOL.

In Judaism, anyway!

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Once it gets a job and moves out of the house? n/t

[LunaC]

8. According to the IRS

only after it's born.

[BlueEyedSon]

18. Probably according to Life Insurance companies too, but I bet a test

case will come up soon.

[mymomwasright]

9. I second the mother answer...

When you don't eat through an umbilical and can breath air instead of water you are officially human.

[norml]

34. Of course all the cells of my body are human, and they are alive

however they are not separate beings.

[Neil Lisst]

10. it could be different times for different purposes

For the purpose of the presumed topic, it's when there is a living, breathing, taking oxygen from the air being.

[SmokingJacket]

11. There is no point... it's a continuum.

A shady area. For legal purposes you have to pin it down, but it's relatively arbitrary.

If I were queen of the world, I'd put it at five months, or at viability.

[DemExpat]

23. Agreed that it is a continuum, quite shady area. I would go for when

the foetus is fully formed - all major systems in place and ready to grow and develop - about 3 months.

DemEx

[stepnw1f]

26. Exactly....

yet some feel they know better than all else and want to legislate thier opinion. Incredibley obvious how flawed these Anti-Choicers' argument is.

[merh]

12. I'm still trying to figure out when many on the far right will become

human beings. :shrug:

[Infomaniac]

13. When s/he can earn their own living.

[valerief]

16. Trick question. It doesn't.

[Mikimouse]

17. Well, let's see. Is it before or after...

it passes through the gilled stage?

[TahitiNut]

19. In a civil, secular sense ... only at birth.

I regard the birth certificate as a kind of 'immigration record' - describing the legitimate event that subjects the person to the sovereignty of our civil government.

People are individually free to regard 'human being' and 'person' and 'individual' in a theological sense according to their own faith.

[Sparkly]

32. Good answer.

I agree -- the term "human being," in its most legalistic meaning, implies rights under the Constitution, etc. It would open a HUGE can of worms for the embryo, zygote, fetus, to be considered an American citizen apart from the woman who's growing it.

I also agree that everybody's free to consider any stage of development equivalent to a "human being" (or just "human life") on a personal level.

You said that very well. :thumbsup:

[uppityperson]

20. Only human beings become human beings.

My cat's embryo will never become a human being.

[stepnw1f]

22. We Are Waiting for You To Tell Us All First

What you think first, then we will share our OPINION with you. Sound like a deal?

[PassingFair]

25. When the woman whose WOMB is occupied SAYS it is.

I, myself, invest the cells WITHIN MY BODY with worth.

That's the way it is.

[fearnobush]

27. When a large piece of shrapnel rips threw its amniotic sack killing

both fetus and mother, usually in Iraq but sometimes in abortion clinics across the United States. Now Big Sean, lets here your yours?

[Greyhound]

28. when it takes it's first independent breath?

But let me re-iterate here that I believe since I am a man, opinion must be subordinate to the woman's.

[dysfunctional press]

29. at age 18 years.

nt

[LeftCoast]

30. Yo! BIG Sean! Where'd ya go?

Surely you don't want us to discuss this all by ourselves do you?

[uppityperson]

57. big sean doesn't seem interested anymore.

driveby?

[mike_c]

31. I presume you're talking about a HUMAN embryo....

When is it anything other than "a human being?" There are no easy, glib answers to that dilemma my friend, and if you think there are then you're fooling yourself.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

33. At birth

That's not my opnion, that's just what the law has always said.

[Nobody]

36. Yes, it's on your 18th BIRTHDAY that you are old enough to vote

So far, no 17 + 3 month olds are eligible to vote.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

62. Well that is when you reach the age of majority

but you become a living sentient being, which is then capable of having rights, at the moment of your birth.

[Nobody]

65. Exactly my point

If we counted from conception, you would be legal to vote on the 18th anniversary of your conception.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

70. LOL, Yes I suppose that would be one way of looking at it

Next time you confront a pro-life fanatic ask them why they do not want to extend rights to the unborn. You'll probably get that blank stare, but it is worth a try.

[Solon]

35. According to the Bible...

Only when the fetus takes its first breath, in other words,at birth.

[politicat]

37. Never.

An zygote becomes a morula becomes a blastocyst becomes a embryo becomes a fetus becomes a neonate.

I'm willing to grant neonates some human rights. (I'm willing to grant older children more rights, up until adulthood.) I'm willing to grant fetuses some rights IF and only IF their mothers have stated that the fetus is wanted and is does not have genetic defects that are incompatible with life. Embryos still have gills.

I won't grant human rights to anything with gills. Ever. That's my bare baseline for rights - it's gotta have lungs for me to give it human rights.

[KittyWampus]

49. I won't grant human rights to anything with gills... that just struck me

as sounding kind of funny :)

[politicat]

60. It's an easy determiner, and it throws anti-choicers for a loop....

Since most of them think that the lungs are there from before conception (apparently spermatazoa carry a spare set in their overnight bags or something).

When I ask if they'd give a salmon rights over a guy's body, they tend to walk away puzzled.

[omega minimo]

38. WHEN IT NO LONGER VOTES REPUBLICAN!!!!!!!!!!!11

:puke:

[johnaries]

39. How do you define "human being"?

In my opinion, many Republicans never made it! :evilgrin:

Seriously....
For anti-abortionists, it's a question of "when the soul enters the body". Most of them believe that the soul enters the body at conception.

Since this belief makes it a religious issue, anti-abortion laws become a matter of one religious group trying to force their religious views on the rest of the country.

Anti-abortionists are trying to violate our religious freedoms, plain and simply.

[Nobody]

46. Oddly enough a Catholic theologian wrote that fetuses have no souls

The article that appeared in the Star Tribune (Mpls) stated as to why he was against abortion was that aborted fetuses don't go to be with God, they get no second chance, no wheel of birth and rebirth (he quoted numerous religious afterlige beliefs) and he point was that each person gets one chance at life.

But by saying that aborted fetuses do NOT go to God (or anywhere else) doesn't that mean NO SOUL?

And if fetuses have no souls, why is he even worrying about it? Then life does begin at birth and this guy is just advocating rapists' rights and control of women, which is what this whole debate boils down to.

[annabanana]

68. Do the works aspirate and spirit have the same base?

I think so. Therefore, the spirit enters at the same time as the first breath.

[Kailassa]

40. When it becomes able to live independantly of its mother.

Unfortunately, neither of my adult sons are human beings yet. ;-)

[upi402]

41. at 4:30 PM

est

[slackmaster]

51. Happy hour?

:toast:

[gollygee]

42. 42

[rasputin1952]

43. Sometimes they never do, just look at bush...

:evilgrin:

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

44. The old "drive by" eh?

[kitty1]

45. When he/she takes their first breath of life (a living soul)

[Nobody]

47. The real question is: When does a human being LOSE personhood?

Answer: When she becomes pregnant.

To listen to the SD legislature, and others of the fundamentalist mindset like certain pharmacists, a blastocyst that hasn't implanted in a woman's uterus yet is a life that trumps that of the living breathing human being it is inside. Even though a good many (I've heard figures from 20% to 50%, I think 50% is high) don't implant at all and no pregnancy occurs.

Pharmacists who should know better refuse to dispense medication that prevents implantation, without which no pregnancy ever existed. The same meds that do not work when an implantation has already taken place.

The antis make one fundamental mistake. They assume women all want the same thing and will react the same way to every crisis.

They assume we are all promiscuous sluts who will have sex all the time unless there is a deterrent.

They assume that we all want loads of children. Or they assume that none of us ever want children. (Which is it, folks, you can't have it both ways)

They assume that we are lying when we report a rape. Notice the "she's a slut" defense is still so prevalent - and it works, even with female juries. Go figure.

They assume that unless they pass a law, we will never turn to our parents in any time of need.

They assume that if we have accurate and complete information about sex and contraception and where babies come from, we will infer that we can and should screw everything in sight.

In short, they assume that women are irresponsible and that we should have some big daddy government poking its nose in our private parts.

[treestar]

48. Too undeterminable so I say forget that question and frame the

issue as: who has the power of life and death over the embryo?

Society with a general rule or the individual pregnant woman? Or any other board, body or group of people?

Even if the beginning of life could be agreed on, some would still argue for a right to abortion and some would still argue against it. Trying to frame the debate that way assumes that if we all agreed when life began, we would also all agree that abortion should not be an option from that point on.

[slackmaster]

50. Here's my personal opinion, the exact timing is still arguable

I believe a developing pre-born individual becomes a human being when its nervous system is developed to the point where it has a sense of self-awareness and an ability to feel pain. The highly developed conscious mind, more than any other single trait, distinguises us from other animals including other primates. I see nothing wrong with a woman deciding to abort a developing cluster of cells that has no sense of being and that experiences no suffering at being destroyed.

Some anti-abortion propagandists are claiming that signs of a developed nervous system appear as early as five or eight weeks. I think that is bogus, as are claims by extreme pro-choicers that an 18- or 22- week fetus can't feel pain. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

I propose as a line in the sand before which there should be no restrictions on abortion, using the following reasoning:

- Start with eight weeks to ensure that the woman has missed two whole menstrual cycles.

- Add another two weeks because conception is most likely half way between the start of one cycle and the next. (Gestation is normally 38 weeks from conception or 40 from the start of the last period.)

- Add another four weeks for her to mull it over. At this point there is no reasonable doubt that she is pregnant if she is in touch with her body.

- Add one more week to allow for discussions with loved ones, making appointments, rescheduling work, child care, etc.

That comes to 15 weeks. Hey, that's pretty close to what Roe v Wade establishes. What a coinky-dink. Maybe the present system isn't broken after all. ;-)

I think states should be able to regulate abortion after that, but any decent state law must have plenty of wiggle room for extenuating circumstances. I think profoundly deformed fetuses (e.g. anencephalic) should be abortable at any time, as should any pregnancy that endangers the life or health of the woman.

In rape or incest situations, perhaps extending the choice window to 25 weeks to allow for the emotional and legal complications that may be involved. After that, aborting a healthy fetus is IMO barbaric.

I usually get fired on by both extremes when I express this kind of balanced view.

[Coexist]

52. Jewish Law addresses this:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_abor.htm

<snip>
Halacha (Jewish law) does define when a fetus becomes a nefesh (person). "...a baby...becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus is considered a 'partial life.' " 5 In the case of a "feet-first" delivery, it happens when most of the fetal body is outside the mother's body.

Jewish beliefs and practice not neatly match either the "pro-life" nor the "pro-choice" points of view. The general principles of modern-day Judaism are that:

The fetus has great value because it is potentially a human life. It gains "full human status at birth only." 2

Abortions are not permitted on the grounds of genetic imperfections of the fetus.

Abortions are permitted to save the mother's life or health.

With the exception of some Orthodox authorities, Judaism supports abortion access for women.

"...each case must be decided individually by a rabbi well-versed in Jewish law." 5

[obreaslan]

53. When it refuses to take the life of another person in the name of Freedom!

I'm just sayin'

:hi:

[patcox2]

55. About 10 or 12 years after birth.

but sadly, some republicans never fully develop into human beings.

[OnionPatch]

58. In light of the fact

that they can grow human tissue in petri dishes now, I'm not so sure the answer to this really means much. My question borders more on the religious: When does the embryo get its "soul" or when does it get the "essence" that makes it more than a few growing cells? Heck, sperm cells can swim and survive out of the body for short periods of time if conditions are right, are they human "life" then? There is just no clear answer to this IMHO. This ends up being a religious idea because science has no clear answer about the soul or the "essence" that makes life.

[SidDithers]

59. When it can drive-by post...

Congratulations, Happy Birthday.

Sid

[Beelzebud]

61. No one is human until that first cup of coffee!

[geniph]

63. When it loses its gills and tail

and can survive independently of the mother. (Yes, they do have gills and a tail.)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

64. As Soon As It Develops Features and Traits That Make It Indistinguishably

human. So not that far into pregnancy really. Human, in the sense of human being, is an adjective. To be used appropriately the subject must have the traits and characteristics that distinguish humans from other creatures. Once that threshold is met, you have a human being. That threshold is met rather early on in pregnancy I believe.

Now as far as being alive goes, I think as soon as the neurons in the brain start firing with purpose the child is alive. That's pretty early on too.

[Raksha]

66. According to Jewish tradition,

when the baby draws his/her first breath. In my opinion, when the nervous system is developed enough to support human consciousness. It takes more than human DNA to make a human being. To me, human CONSCIOUSNESS is the litmus test.

[andyv]

71. .

So a 3 months old baby is not a human being?

[annabanana]

67. When he moves out....

from the mom of teen boys

[michreject]

69. When you can claim

him/her on your taxes.

I would love to see someone sue to claim a unborn as a dependant on their taxes.