"Up to about 25 weeks, whether or not it's sucking its thumb or has personality or all that, the fetus cannot survive outside of its mother. So is that life, or not?" (Yet, it cannot survive at 25 weeks yet...)
"That is a moral, ethical, and religious question, not one for science." (It most certainly is! - If science can't face the fact that we exist and are alive in the womb, and therefore can be killed on a woman's whim, it is being intellectually dishonest to say the least!)
"Things can behave and not be alive." (Prove to me the fetus is NOT alive)
"Right-to-lifers may say that this research proves that a fetus is alive, but it does not. It cannot."
WHAT?!?!?
Did this person realize the utter stupidity of that statement?
A fetus is a living human being at its earliest development...when exactly does it become 'alive'?
If it wasn't 'alive' we wouldn't he able to KILL IT!!!!
"Fetal research only changes the abortion debate for people who think that life starts at some magical point," maintains Heidelise AIs, a psychologist at Harvard University. "If you believe that life begins at conception, then you don't need the proof of fetal behavior." For others, however, abortion is a very complex issue and involves far more than whether research shows that a fetus is alive. "Your circumstances and personal beliefs have much more impact on the decision," she observes.
This is relativism at its worst...
Again, how twisted can these people be? A magical point? It that the buzz word for conception? Complex issue? For people who want to rationalize abortions.
At conception you exist....you start there and continue to develop. PERIOD. The debate for pro- abortionists is about how old fetus must be before it can or can't be killed.
"The research is much more relevant for issues regarding viable fetuses--preemies." Simply put, say the three, their work is intended to help the babies that live--not to decide whether fetuses should."
WAIT! I thought the fetuses weren't alive to begin with....so if they're not alive how can this research have anything to do with decided "whether fetuses should" live.
Holy Cow... I am SO aggravated right now.....
"That is a moral, ethical, and religious question, not one for science." (It most certainly is! - If science can't face the fact that we exist and are alive in the womb, and therefore can be killed on a woman's whim, it is being intellectually dishonest to say the least!) The reason I believe it is more of a philosophical question, is that the science of human biology does not address why we recognize rights in things. For one, the biology is qualitatively similar to the biology of rightsless things, such as lower animals. Second, the concept of rights was well-developed (mostly developed, really) before any knowledge of genetics and embryology. John Locke's notion of human rights was not held in suspense until we found out whether humans had 46 or 146 chromosomes. The empirical observations needed to understand rights were available to men thousands of years ago.
Prove to me the fetus is NOT alive
It is alive, in the sense that it has functioning cellular processes. "Life" is an ambinguous term. It can mean many things including "human life" and "individual human life". I think if we could come up with a less ambiguous term it would also help to better understand the issue.
"Right-to-lifers may say that this research proves that a fetus is alive, but it does not. It cannot." WHAT?!?!? Did this person realize the utter stupidity of that statement? A fetus is a living human being at its earliest development...when exactly does it become 'alive'? If it wasn't 'alive' we wouldn't he able to KILL IT!!!!
I agree. "Life" being ambiguous, there is no telling what the speaker meant, and he should have known better. In one sense of the word "life", he is clearly in factual error.
A magical point? It that the buzz word for conception? Complex issue? For people who want to rationalize abortions. At conception you exist....you start there and continue to develop.
Actually, the developmental continuum is everpresent. The speaker astutely used the word "magical" because some people believe that there is a discontinuity in space and time sometime around conception. The belief in such a discontinuity is magical thinking. Enough is known about biology, chemistry, and physics, to know that the continuum is not interrupted.
WAIT! I thought the fetuses weren't alive to begin with....so if they're not alive how can this research have anything to do with decided "whether fetuses should" live. Holy Cow... I am SO aggravated right now.....
What's aggravating to me is many different ways that "life" and "alive" are used in the same article. However, that does also reflect the confusion in the debate in general.