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

To: rollo tomasi
Parthenogenesis needs to be manipulated through outside chemical stimulus in order for a female egg to become some weird embryonic mutation so severely horrific that it dies within days.

So, you don't consider such an embryo to be a human being?

The fact that external assistance is necessary to allow the egg to develop into an embryo shouldn't matter. After all, a zygote needs a human womb and the nutrients of a woman to develop. The fact is, we now know that a fertilized zygote and a female egg both independently contain all the genetic information necessary for further development into the embryonic stage. If embryos are people, why shouldn't they both be considered human beings?

And researchers are working to correct the defects that prevent the parthenogenic embryos from reaching full development. I doubt that any pro-lifer will deny that a born baby created from nothing more than a female egg is a human being. Considering this, shouldn't the female egg be given the benefit of the doubt and be treated as a person?

And this is not the abuse of metaphysics, this is simply an example of how fuzzy the question of personhood is. Future examples will have to do with artificial intelligence, which will produce androids who are thousands of times smarter than you or I and who will be able to make extremely compelling arguments as to why they should be treated as persons.

86 posted on 02/24/2006 11:27:12 AM PST by BearArms
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]


To: BearArms
You might want look into Ian Wilmut's research and experimentation on human parthenogenesis before spouting the likes of Peter Singer's and his ilk desperate arguments you are parroting.

Note the biggest obstacle to human parthenogenesis is genetic activators within sperm, hmmmm wonder why?
98 posted on 02/27/2006 6:45:13 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: BearArms
"So, you don't consider such an embryo to be a human being?"

It's up in the air but some, especially Clergy members think humans should not take that "risk".

Ian Walmut thinks it's "biologically impossible" due to genomic imprinting "whereby the parent puts his or her own stamp on the gene, according to the parent’s sex,” or so he says.
99 posted on 02/27/2006 7:11:30 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | 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