Re: New Abortion Quiz

George--

Essentially your argument says it's OK to extract stem cells since we
don't know yet if we're killing one or two or more human beings.

But, I will modify my sdtatement to:

* The fertilized egg is HUMAN, one or more human beings (to account for
the possibility of multiple births), albeit in a very early stage of
development.

Blessings,

--Bill

George Murphy wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Yates" <billyates@billyates.com>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 4:14 PM
> Subject: Re: New Abortion Quiz
>
>
>> Let's get down to basics...
>>
>> * Humans begin as the union of sperm and egg.
>> * The DNA of the fertilized egg is human DNA, a combination of the
>> parent's DNA.
>> * The fertilized egg is HUMAN, a human being, albeit in a very early
>> stage of development.
>> * The fertilized egg is ALIVE. It takes in energy from the mother and
>> grows.
>> * Therefore, we can accurately describe the fertilized egg as a LIVING
>> HUMAN BEING.
>> * We apply different terms to the developing human being depending on
>> its stage of development.
>> * Despite the different terms--blastocyst, embryu, fetus, baby--the
>> developing human being is STILL A LIVING HUMAN BEING.
>> * At the earlier stages of development, the developing human being is
>> incapable of self-sustaining its life.
>> * The fact that it is incapable of self-sustaining life does not
>> negate or invalidate its essential character as a LIVING HUMAN BEING.
>> * At various points in the human life span--infancy, accident,
>> illness, during surgery--a person may be incapable of self-sustaining
>> life.
>> * The fact that one may be incapable of self-sustaining life does not
>> negate or invalidate one's essential character as a LIVING HUMAN BEING.
>> * The fact that one may be less capable than another of performing
>> certain acts, ranging from cognition to ambulation, due to birth
>> defect, accident, or illness, does not negate or invalidate their
>> essential character as a LIVING HUMAN BEING.
>> * Human beings are intrinsically significant and of value, not only to
>> other human beings, but even more importantly, to God.
>> * Therefore, the taking of any human life is an act of great import
>> and not to be taken lightly.
>> * There are very limited circumstances when the taking of human life
>> is allowed: self-defense and war.
>> * The taking of a human life for the convenience of another is immoral
>> as it reduces the victim to the role of commodity for the pleasure of
>> another and denies their essential worth as a human being.
>> * Abortion, from sacrificing a fertilized egg for its stem cells, to
>> "partial birth abortion", is the taking of a HUMAN LIFE.
>
>
> Bill -
>
> One thing that is problematic about your argument is the apparently
> innocuous little word "a" as in "a living human being." The reason that
> that's questionable is that for a few days after conception (I will let
> the embryologists try to say just when) it is possible for the conceptus
> to develop into _two_ - or even more - living human beings. Thus one
> cannot speak unambiguously of _a_ human being at such early stages of
> development. This suggests that one can take a strong position against
> abortion of a fetus at later stages of development and still hold
> consistently that destruction of a conceptus at very early stages, for
> stem cell research or other reasons, may be legitimate.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>
>
>
>

-- 
--Bill Yates
--mailto:billyates@billyates.com
--http://www.billyates.com
--CD Reviewer, Webmaster, Roots66.com
--Editor, WorldVillage.com's Believer's Weekly
--Theron Services: Web Design, Editing, Writing