Well- if wasn't you who contended that any cell containing human DNA is a human being, I apologize. The statement is ignorant whoever said it. Otherwise your fingernail clippings would be able to vote- given enough time.
And here you go offering ANOTHER bizarre aside- cows now!
We're talking about HUMAN sperm meets HUMAN egg= human being.
Want to talk about sci-fi human crosses? Start another thread. Human + anything else biologically possible would be humanoid. You won't admit human egg+sperm produces human beings. Would you argue that the cow egg wouldn't produce a cow?
Answer my questions.
--Want to talk about sci-fi human crosses? Start another thread.
It's not sci-fi. It happened.
--Human + anything else biologically possible would be humanoid. You won't admit human egg+sperm produces human beings.
Why should I have to 'admit' human egg+sperm produces human beings. I don't know anyone that would deny such an obvious fact.
--Would you argue that the cow egg wouldn't produce a cow?
Answer my questions.
It would have human DNA. Are you saying it would be a cow?
It was he who argued that perspective. Others are talking specifically about the fertilised egg that results from the union of a human sperm and human egg. THAT cell is what was being discussed as being a disticnt human being and it was clear to anyone who read the posts. The ridiculous rabbit trail of *any cell having human DNA is a human being* was not proposed by any of the pro-life crowd. They, at least, see the distinction.