With all due respect to Judge Bork, taken literally, his statement is factually incorrect. There is no meaningful moment. On small enough time scales, almost all biological process are continuous and smooth, especially complex ones such as conception.
After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into existence. This is no longer a matter of taste or opinion. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception." Dr. Jerome Lejeune, genetics professor
His first sentence may be true, but his third sentence is plainly false, if by "beginning" he refers to a infinitessimal time point (which he most likely does not).
"By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic.
Ditto. There is no specific "moment", but rather a process.
"The question as to when a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and should be answered by human embryologists - not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists."
Instead of being factually false, this one is just an opinion I disagree with. The issue is primarily one of rights.
"The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question - not a scientific question. I will not go into great detail here, but ""personhood"" begins when the human being begins - at fertilization."
Here I agree that it is a philosophical, not scientific, question. But if he means by "begin" that there is a specific meaningful time point, then he is factually in error.
Much of the rest of your posting are pretty standard biology, with no bearing on the issue, except to the extent that the biological descriptions presuppose the space-time continuum.
It is fine for scientists to speak to one another about "beginnings" and "moments" in some vague sense presupposing the underlying continua. However, too many lay people (such as yourself, apparently) take such language literally and actually come to believe that there are magical poofs in time. However, such poofs are at odds with our most abundant observations.
Yes, and no one ever wins the Boston Marathon because before they can finish the race, they need to get to the halfway point, and before they can get to the halfway point they have to reach the halfway point of the halfway point and so on ad infinitum until you reason yourself into a standstill.
You're not talking biology. You're not even talking good philosophy.
You, my lad, have descended into the ignominous depths of sophistry, where there is no reasoning, and thus no valid argument.
My arrows will go faster than your turtle any day.
I would have to disagree with you. You seem hung up on the when -as if defining exactly the 'when' must be determined before attempting to intelligently act upon the matter. Simply put, we know the what -before the sperm there is no new life -after the sperm there is. We can measure and observe the before and after quite easily -the answer is obvious to all but those in denial...