Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: supercat

I was speaking of seeds of plants, not of the embryo of humans, and definitely not speaking about the artificial state of stasis due to freezing. I'll admit that I don't know or understand the computer code analogy, but I do understand stasis as in the frozen embryos and the function of the placenta and umbilical cord.

The embryo in stasis is alive, otherwise we would truly be creating life on thawing him. Instead, the living processes -both generative and degenerative - are halted by freezing. But, this is not a natural process, it's an intervention by humans, and those who act to interfere in such a way must do everything in their power to return the embryo to safety. Some would say that the act of freezing the embryo is in itself an act of aggression that is not allowed because of the danger to the life in the freezing and thawing processes.

The placenta and umbilical cord are specialized tissues that are used for a given time and sloughed off. The spleen functions in one way in the fetus and infant and another way later. The appendix is apparently always useless in humans. None of these facts have any thing at all to do with the right not to be killed that all humans possess.

If anything, the placenta is more analogous to the mouth, lungs, and kidneys of the child after birth. The "program" is in the DNA of all the cells, from the zygote to the placenta and body of the infant, and to the somatic cells of the adult. At any given time, some cells have some of the program "booted" and others are dormant, while other cells will have different configurations. The same cells will boot different sections of the program at different times as well. None of the program is discarded by design.


237 posted on 06/13/2004 8:05:27 PM PDT by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies ]


To: hocndoc; tpaine
Some would say that the act of freezing the embryo is in itself an act of aggression that is not allowed because of the danger to the life in the freezing and thawing processes.

It is at least interference in the LIBERTY of the embryo, is it not? What right does someone have to halt the living processes of someone else by freezing him, without his consent, and without any due process?

Cordially,

238 posted on 06/14/2004 10:11:39 AM PDT by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson