Posted on 11/06/2003 2:43:16 PM PST by nickcarraway
Life does not begin when sperm meets egg, but 14 days after, according to the head of the Anglican Church in Australia.
Primate Peter Carnley told the Fertility Society of Australia in Perth yesterday this meant objections to IVF, genetic testing and stem cell research should fall away.
Archbishop Carnley said that until it was implanted in a womb lining, a fertilised egg was not a human life but rather a genetically novel kind of cell.
The fertilised egg must also pass the point that it could split to become an identical twin, which was at about 14 days. After that, the embryo should be accorded the status of an individual human with rights to care, protection and life.
Dr Carnley's position clearly contradicts that of the Catholic Church, which holds that life begins when an egg is fertilised.
But Dr Carnley said the debate about the beginning of life within the Christian faith did not come to that view until 1869, when Pius IX declared all abortion was wrong from the beginning of conception.
Dr Carnley argued that scientific knowledge had moved forward since then and must be taken into account.
If conception was defined as the meeting of gametes - egg and sperm - then the cloned sheep Dolly was not conceived, because Dolly was the product of cell nuclear transfer, where the ovum nucleus was replaced by DNA from an adult cell.
"I think it is now clear that we must begin to think of conception less as a moment and more in gradual and continuous terms as a process," Dr Carnley said.
He said since 1984 Anglican moral theology had concluded that conception was a 14-day process and this helped shape legislation around the world.
"Given that twinning can occur up to the 14th day of this process, it is not logically possible to talk of the conception of a unique human individual prior to the completion of this process.
"Each of us can say that we came to be in the sense that we were each conceived, as a potential human individual, 14 days after the fertilisation of an ovum, not before." He said the natural 60 per cent wastage of ova during IVF procedures need not be considered the killing of conceived human individuals.
"We do not have some 70,000 frozen people on ice at various places around Australia," he said.
Embryo experimentation and stem cell research were also morally acceptable.
"If there is a utilitarian argument for the possible benefit to mankind of experimentation on embryos, this could be tolerated in a controlled way under licence up until the 14th day in a way that after the 14th day it would not," he said.
"Stem cell research becomes also thinkable, for stem cells are harvested well within the 14th day period."
The whole subject matter of "when does life begin?" is a false premise. Life began in the Garden of Eden, that's when "life began", period, end of discussion.
The pro-life movement should cease being suckered into this dead-end alley debate of "oh gee, when does life begin?"
It's almost identical to the pro Second Amendment movement being suckered into the "...you don't need an assault weapon to kill Bambi" dead-end alley. The 2nd is not, and never was, about hunting, period.
Not the clearest reply I've ever heard. Is it your contention that the beginning is at the time of "the fusion of the parent chromosomes", or is it at the time of the first mitosis?
Why so evasive? You said clearly that there was a "beginning". I simply ask you, WHEN is the beginning? Do you believe the beginning to be at the conclusion of nucleic acid replication, or at the conclusion of mitosis, or at some other time point?
The newly conceived single-celled life (the zygote) begins a process called mitosis (cell division) within hours after fertilization. Cell division indicates a new human life is expressing itself—the new human life is being, doing the things a living thing does to survive in its environment, metabolizing and growing.
Before the union of sperm and oocyte of human parents, there is not the new individual; following the fusion of the 23 chromosomes from female and 23 chromosomes from male within the zona pellucida and the excretion of the polar body, the advent of cell division is acceptable evidence to me that a new member of the species is in evidence, living along the continuum of its lifetime.
If you continue to conduct your posts in a condescending, insulting, peckerhead manner, I don't feel compelled to further discuss these issues with you. Want to continue? ... At least behave like an adult.
"Some call them millions." (Guess who said that and in what movie and win a virtual prize.)
It's surprising that adult people on this thread actually believe there is some sort of a mystical interruption of the "chain of life", a "poof" as one astute poster put it, that restarts each new person (actually I think they mean to apply it to all animals). They quote a bunch of standard cell biology and embryology, which of course says nothing of the sort, and claim that the great poof is somehow confirmed by it. It would be amusing if these same people weren't so vitriolic and humorless in their nonsense.
Don't do this to yourself, man. At least do a Google search on Zeno before you go down the same debacle of "fallacy of the beard".
Now, to rehash, in response to my contention that there is no meaningful dividing time point within the continuum of life, you disagreed by asserting "the reality of that continuum having a beginning". Since you assert a beginning, implying a time point, there is nothing wrong with me asking you what it is. There is no paradox in specifying a time point, not even to Zeno.
If you wish to change your mind, and recognize the fact of the continuum, that there is no time point designating the beginning of a new human being, then there is nothing left to argue. Otherwise, I have to assume you believe there is a meaningful dividing time point, and I will try to glean from your answer when that is. I said, "If you WILL give a time, then I will show you why you are wrong." In order for me to do that, you must give me a time.
*****************************************
Before the union of sperm and oocyte of human parents, there is not the new individual
Okay. May I assume that the time point of which you are so fond is at the beginning of "the union of sperm and oocyte"?
*****************************************
fusion of the 23 chromosomes from female and 23 chromosomes from male within the zona pellucida
An aside, but the zona pellucida refers to the glycoprotein coat outside the oocyte, and the chromosomes do not fuse "within" this coat. At least that is the usual language in embryology even though the coat surrounds the oocyte. Similarly, we say things take place within the cell, and not within the cell membrane (unless it actually does occur within the membrane, like ion channel activation).
peckerhead...At least behave like an adult.
I recall one mature adult once writing to me, "I'm amused, you arrogant little prick, not frustrated! Bwahahaha"
Frankly, an adult should be prepared to reap what he sows.
The voice of experience.......?
Your condescencion is insulting, you are so immature that you cannot stop it, and I feel no further responsibility to offer to you recognition. [Buh bye
I suppose your vileness stems from your haughty ignorance being repeatedly outted. I doubt that I'm the first to embarrass you, and it is apparently more than your fragile ego can stand. Hopefully you can privately learn what you publically deny, so for your benefit I will summarize for you some key points of learning from our "debate" that you might absorb once your wounded pride drops its walls. You should realize that these points need have no impact upon your religious beliefs, so you don't need to use that as an excuse to anneal your ignorance.
(1) In multiple posts to me you clearly and repeatedly denied that there exists a continuum of events from gametes through embryo. You should know that to the best of any cell biologist's, embryologist's, or physicist's knowledge, there is, in fact a continuum (series of insignificant changes) running from primary gametes, through gametes, through the process of fertilization, through cell division, through childbirth and gemetogenesis, adulthood, and fertilization again. The continuum extends back through our parents and ancestors, and will extend forward through our children and descendents. The continuum branches and has tributaries. The continuum is fundamental and is how biology works. Nature doesn't much care if man wants clear and precise dividing lines.
(2) Although simply denying the continuum in biological temporal processes above quantum scales is fallacious because it is factually incorrect, denying the continuum because you think that the presence of a continuum means nothing can be significantly different anywhere along the continuum is the fallacy of the beard. The fallacy of the beard (a real term, regarless of your denial) is a true fallacy that can be described in syllogistic form, and not, as you say, "merely endless rhetoric withour conclusion". You can save yourself from committing this fallacy in the future by simply realizing that although neighboring events in continua are insignificantly different, distant events may be very much different. Just think of the continuum of the electromagnetic spectrum, and realize that red and blue, though lacking sharp dividing lines, are different.
(3) The fact of continua is NOT the same as any of Zeno's "paradoxes" just because Zeno made use of the concept of a time continuum (in the mathematical rather than the physical sense) to generate his classic paradoxes. I won't explain them to you here, but if you take the time to read and understand them, you will see that I have made no attempt to evoke them. In fact, my use of "continuum" can include discrete (though insignificantly small) steps, thus making Zeno utterly irrelevant to the discussion.
(4) Although I suggested in my last post that you may have mistyped that "chromosomal fusion" occurred "within the zona pellucida", your repeated use of it shows that you think it is accepted phraseology. Sure you know what you mean, but what you apparently don't know is that when people hear you say "within the ZP", they will often think you mean "within the ZP" and NOT "within the oocyte". This will help save you from sounding ignorant, which is obviously quite painful to you. Consider what "zona" means.
(5) You might not want to assume that people you argue with lack a formal education in the subject at hand simply because they don't want to argue with appeals to authority. Unusual observations certainly merit references, but when you have a clear understanding of the readily available common knowledge of a subject, you should be able to explain it in your own words, tailored to the specific discussion underway.
(6) If you can't take your own medicine, then perhaps you should consider being less rude in the future. I am happy to speak your own language to you and make my points in any tone you set, but I needn't feign respect for you when you don't in kind. I don't disrespect you because you're foolish. Our natural limitations make fools of us all in some ways at some times. It is part of the human condition of which I am so enamored. I disrespect you because you are disrespetful and utterly unsympathetic. Consider that in your future interactions. Consider also that I am only writing this now because I believe you are worth it.
(7) I recommend you thoroughly read Alexander Pope's short "An Essay on Criticism" if you haven't already. It is astonishingly pithy, and may be enlightening.
I firmly believe that if you drop your pride and take these points to heart, even if only privately, you will be a better man.
It begins twice?
The life of an individual human being begins at the fusion of the cells of the sperm and the oocyte.
Does this refer to the onset of fusion, or the completion of fusion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.