Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If I cloned myself (don't think for a moment that day will never come) is my clone a human being or just some of my tissue that I can do with what I please?every cell in your body has the same DNA signature. That is what makes you a unique person
When a unique DNA signature is created at conception it can be argue that a new person has been created.
You sure about that?Your one random skin cell is not it’s own organism.
You sure about that?
Why?Yes.
If you engage in creation of a new human being through alternative means, I.e. cloning or what have you, you have altered a cell that is part of the body of the individual you want cloned and created a new human being via a different method. That newly made human being still has its own body comprised of its own cells.Why?
Makes sense to me. So you start off with a skin cell and end up with a newly made human being with its own body comprised of its own cells born from a surrogate mother. That new human, I presume you'll agree, is deserving of rights like any other human being. My question is, when is that skin cell become a human being?If you engage in creation of a new human being through alternative means, I.e. cloning or what have you, you have altered a cell that is part of the body of the individual you want cloned and created a new human being via a different method. That newly made human being still has its own body comprised of its own cells.
If you do some currently science fiction but not all that far off technique to emulate fertilization like has been done in other animals, then the new human being has its lifespan begin at the equivalent step with the zygote stage of life.Makes sense to me. So you start off with a skin cell and end up with a newly made human being with its own body comprised of its own cells born from a surrogate mother. That new human, I presume you'll agree, is deserving of rights like any other human being. My question is, when is that skin cell become a human being?
OK, so it's not really about the DNA, it is about the whole system? If I put a skin cell into a hormone bath that will stimulate it to divide and develop, it is now a human being? Interesting.If you do some currently science fiction but not all that far off technique to emulate fertilization like has been done in other animals, then the new human being has its lifespan begin at the equivalent step with the zygote stage of life.
Just saying, not debatingWhat does that matter?
At conception the unique human DNA fingerprint is established. That is a scientific fact and is not in dispute.
The only real question is when is that new zygote granted the legal right of personhood.
If it is the moment of birth then legally there can be no repercussions against mother or doctor or anyone else if the pregnancy is terminated at any time before birth.
If it is as some people say the moment of conception then a whole new can of worms is opened with all kinds of consequences.
Stupid question.If I cloned myself (don't think for a moment that day will never come) is my clone a human being or just some of my tissue that I can do with what I please?
How valuable is 'unique' DNA? We dropped bombs on Germany and Japan and killed thousands of people and their unique DNA. Were we justified in thinking that there were more important things (like winning a war) than their unique DNA?
Why?Stupid question.
And comparing this topic to WWII is even more stupid than you clone example.
War is never a good example to use when discussing murder because war is subject to its own rules of engagement that have no place in life at any other time.Why?
If a woman decides to get an abortion, she is not in control of her uterusListen to this GUY telling women that they are morons.
Keep it up
Mother Nature gives the Zygote control.The “argument” is about who controls a woman’s uterus.
This I understand and agree with this. What I don't understand is the people who claim that science can answer the question. To me, until the development of a uniquely human brain, the zygote/fetus is just a collection of DNA and other organic molecules (unique or not), not worthy of superseding the rights of the mother.The question that is relevant to abortion is when the human zygote is LEGALLY not biologically recognized as a person with the full compliment of human rights we recognize in all people who have been born.
What exactly is the part of this you don't understand?
The Fed is bigger. There are women in legislatures today any many don’t agree with your manspeak.Ummm, so the decision is in the hands of State governments?
And they ain' big?
ps.....Leo, size matters. And states ARE big government. More than a few of U.S. states are bigger than many many countries.
But in your world a legislature full of men should tell an adult woman what she can and cannot do with her very own and very personal uterus?
I don't think that is right.
As has been posted on this chatroom before: "If you don't have a uterus ...shut the f*** up!"
Not true because the woman can choose to rid herself of the zygote in many waysMother Nature gives the Zygote control.
A human zygote is a human being at a specific stage of development. Everything that is needed to develop is there already. This is a scientific fact there is no getting around that.This I understand and agree with this. What I don't understand is the people who claim that science can answer the question. To me, until the development of a uniquely human brain, the zygote/fetus is just a collection of DNA and other organic molecules (unique or not), not worthy of superseding the rights of the mother.
Really. A fetus is given the right to life in many US states. I didn't say anything about full compliments.Not really
a fetus has not been given the full compliment of rights as born persons.
