Which should have first priority: The woman, the fertilized egg, or the fetus?

[Redfish]

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

Your biggest problem you have, is understanding your own publication. I already linked the definition of "life" to you through Wikipedia. What your publication is offering to you is this, that the zygote/embryo/ fetus will develop into a fully developed human being, while calling it a human being. It still is not a fully developed human being. And that is what you struggle to understand.You are simply desperate to inject an argument for your desired narrative, when you fail to understand the totality of the meanings from your own publications that you post. You don't get it, because you don't want to get it. You want to call it a human being? Knock yourself out. But even your own publication does not do that. You need to know how to understand the difference between a developing hb and a fully developed human being. Which is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you.

There you go again, using that ridiculous phrase "fully developed human being" which just shows that you STILL don't get it, and you're still putting forth your own confused ideas as fact.

No, the quotes are clear. They're all saying basically the same thing: human life begins at conception. There are numerous different stages of life - but in each of those stages, you have a genetically unique individual, living human being. And I didn't post a "publication" - I posted a variety of quotes, from different people, quotes from medical textbooks.

Again, a zygote or embryo is not supposed to look like a newborn or a child, it looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life.

It's getting boring trying to discuss this with you, because you're being repetitive, ignoring quotes from scientists and medical textbooks, and putting forth your own confused, politically-driven misguided ideas as fact.

Your premise, that the fetus "looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life", is utterly false. It's not a "human being", until it's sentient, aware, and able to breathe on its own.

Fully 1/3 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage or "spontaneous abortion". A fetus is NOT a human being. It's a potential human being, and a lot of stuff has to go right for that little zygote to make it as a fully formed human being.



Unless and until the

In your politically-driven, misguided, unscientific opinion. Honestly, to deny that the preborn is a human makes you look ignorant, I'm trying to help you here:


“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

*********

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D., the first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization, from Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40

*********

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:


*********

“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

*********

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

*********

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

*********


National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization” 11/18/13

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

*********



Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144
“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”
Quoted in Randy Alcorn “Pro-life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments” (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2000)

*********


“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55

*********

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”

*********

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3
“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”

*********

Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943

“Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism…. At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun. ”

*********

Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”

*********

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, [at conception] the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

*********

“The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”

Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.

congrats to you...

totally inaccurate, but you knew that and posted in anyway, typical libtardian

 

[PoliticalChic]

Women come first.

There is no 'first/'

The only danger is to her soul.

 

[Moonglow]

Women come first.

There is no 'first/'

The only danger is to her soul.

Well with saving the woman you can have more kids, killing off the woman not so much..

 

[denmark]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

 

[Redfish]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

 

[denmark]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

 

[Justin Richardson]

thats a legal stretch and everyone knows it. But I asked for language from the CONSTITUTION. Why cant you admit that it doesnt exist. the constitution is silent on abortion.

The Fourteenth Amendment is a layer of "Right to Privacy". Known as The Human Life Amendment. Human life amendments include any amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would have the effect of overturning Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1973), the Supreme Court decision that denied states the authority to prohibit abortion.

 

[Redfish]

thats a legal stretch and everyone knows it. But I asked for language from the CONSTITUTION. Why cant you admit that it doesnt exist. the constitution is silent on abortion.

The Fourteenth Amendment is a layer of "Right to Privacy". Known as The Human Life Amendment. Human life amendments include any amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would have the effect of overturning Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (U.S. 1973), the Supreme Court decision that denied states the authority to prohibit abortion.

I understand that that is the reasoning behind Roe. But everyone knows that is very shaky from a legal standpoint. Its a stretch to equate abortion to privacy. Using that logic it would be OK to murder someone in the privacy of your basement.

 

[Justin Richardson]

I understand that that is the reasoning behind Roe. But everyone knows that is very shaky from a legal standpoint. Its a stretch to equate abortion to privacy. Using that logic it would be OK to murder someone in the privacy of your basement.

You know they will. And you are correct. I doubt we will ever going to stop Abortion totally. Politicians are going to try to dictate what a woman should do regardless.

 

[Redfish]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

The issue here is when does a fertilized egg become a human being with the right to life. We can argue the details forever, but until that issue is agreed upon this will go on.

I dont know if SCOTUS will have the guts to take it on based on the Alabama law, probably not.

How about a national referendum? you on the left keep screaming that we are a true democracy, then why not put it to a national vote and let the majority view prevail? Are you ok with that?

 

[denmark]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

The issue here is when does a fertilized egg become a human being with the right to life. We can argue the details forever, but until that issue is agreed upon this will go on.

I dont know if SCOTUS will have the guts to take it on based on the Alabama law, probably not.

How about a national referendum? you on the left keep screaming that we are a true democracy, then why not put it to a national vote and let the majority view prevail? Are you ok with that?

Ethics and freedom are beyond law.
Slavery was lawful in the past, and women were not allowed to vote, by law.
Are you not grateful that ethics and freedom prevailed over unjust laws?

 

[Redfish]

Equal priority can be done pretty well.

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

The issue here is when does a fertilized egg become a human being with the right to life. We can argue the details forever, but until that issue is agreed upon this will go on.

I dont know if SCOTUS will have the guts to take it on based on the Alabama law, probably not.

How about a national referendum? you on the left keep screaming that we are a true democracy, then why not put it to a national vote and let the majority view prevail? Are you ok with that?

Ethics and freedom are beyond law.
Slavery was lawful in the past, and women were not allowed to vote, by law.
Are you not grateful that ethics and freedom prevailed over unjust laws?

when did murder become ethical? when did murder equate with freedom? Under the third Reich?

so how about a national referendum? you ignored that question. Are you willing to abide by the will of the majority as you libs keep demanding?

 

[denmark]

... If the pregnant woman chooses.

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

The issue here is when does a fertilized egg become a human being with the right to life. We can argue the details forever, but until that issue is agreed upon this will go on.

I dont know if SCOTUS will have the guts to take it on based on the Alabama law, probably not.

How about a national referendum? you on the left keep screaming that we are a true democracy, then why not put it to a national vote and let the majority view prevail? Are you ok with that?

Ethics and freedom are beyond law.
Slavery was lawful in the past, and women were not allowed to vote, by law.
Are you not grateful that ethics and freedom prevailed over unjust laws?

when did murder become ethical? when did murder equate with freedom? Under the third Reich?

so how about a national referendum? you ignored that question. Are you willing to abide by the will of the majority as you libs keep demanding?

Abortion is not “murder”.
Is a miscarriage (natural abortion) murder?
Did Trump get elected by a majority?
You are talking religion & politics.
I care more for ethics and liberty of sentient animals.

 

[Lakhota]

Should a woman forced to carry a fetus receive child support, healthcare, and other benefits?

 

[Redfish]

and the newly created human being has zero choice in whether he/she lives or dies? Why not allow "abortion" up to 2 years in age? if the kid becomes inconvenient, just do away with it. That would be consistent with the position being taken by the left on this issue.

If you can read, I referred to PREGNANT women. If the “newly created human being” gets PREGNANT, then they can choose.

The issue here is when does a fertilized egg become a human being with the right to life. We can argue the details forever, but until that issue is agreed upon this will go on.

I dont know if SCOTUS will have the guts to take it on based on the Alabama law, probably not.

How about a national referendum? you on the left keep screaming that we are a true democracy, then why not put it to a national vote and let the majority view prevail? Are you ok with that?

Ethics and freedom are beyond law.
Slavery was lawful in the past, and women were not allowed to vote, by law.
Are you not grateful that ethics and freedom prevailed over unjust laws?

when did murder become ethical? when did murder equate with freedom? Under the third Reich?

so how about a national referendum? you ignored that question. Are you willing to abide by the will of the majority as you libs keep demanding?

Abortion is not “murder”.
Is a miscarriage (natural abortion) murder?
Did Trump get elected by a majority?
You are talking religion & politics.
I care more for ethics and liberty of sentient animals.

if its not murder why is someone who kills a pregnant woman charged with two counts of murder?

Trump got elected by a majority of the EC, just like Obama, Clinton, Bush, et. al

I explained that this is about a difference of opinion as to when a fertilized human egg becomes a human being with the right to life. I suggested a national referendum to decide that based on a majority view.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

Posters on here are claiming that abortion kills children or kids, which is a lie, because there is no established Biological evidence that a fetus in the womb is either one. They hijack the narrative to feed everyone inaccurate information. The same that you are doing.

And as my previous post points out, the definition of human being, says it is a man, woman, or child. It does not reference the pre-born. Why? Because it can't? And why is that? Because the definition has not established that it is a human being in the womb that is experiencing life? And why is that? Because Life has not been established in the womb from a scientific interpretation. You would tell us it is life based on your own convenient interpretation, but you have zero proof. Therefore, no one can accurately claim life, children, or kid while the fetus is in the womb.

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

Your biggest problem you have, is understanding your own publication. I already linked the definition of "life" to you through Wikipedia. What your publication is offering to you is this, that the zygote/embryo/ fetus will develop into a fully developed human being, while calling it a human being. It still is not a fully developed human being. And that is what you struggle to understand.You are simply desperate to inject an argument for your desired narrative, when you fail to understand the totality of the meanings from your own publications that you post. You don't get it, because you don't want to get it. You want to call it a human being? Knock yourself out. But even your own publication does not do that. You need to know how to understand the difference between a developing hb and a fully developed human being. Which is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you.

There you go again, using that ridiculous phrase "fully developed human being" which just shows that you STILL don't get it, and you're still putting forth your own confused ideas as fact.

No, the quotes are clear. They're all saying basically the same thing: human life begins at conception. There are numerous different stages of life - but in each of those stages, you have a genetically unique individual, living human being. And I didn't post a "publication" - I posted a variety of quotes, from different people, quotes from medical textbooks.

Again, a zygote or embryo is not supposed to look like a newborn or a child, it looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life.

It's getting boring trying to discuss this with you, because you're being repetitive, ignoring quotes from scientists and medical textbooks, and putting forth your own confused, politically-driven misguided ideas as fact.

Your premise, that the fetus "looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life", is utterly false. It's not a "human being", until it's sentient, aware, and able to breathe on its own.

Fully 1/3 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage or "spontaneous abortion". A fetus is NOT a human being. It's a potential human being, and a lot of stuff has to go right for that little zygote to make it as a fully formed human being.



Unless and until the

Your premise, that if you state your viewpoint as fact it will become fact, is utterly false. A fetus is a living human organism; this is inarguable. Your arbitrary goalposts of "sentient, aware, and able to breathe on its own" appear nowhere in scientific texts as requirements to be a living organism.

I have no idea what point you're trying to make with "1/3 of pregnancies end in miscarriage". So does that mean that because embryos die on their own, they were never alive? If so, I should like to point out that ALL living organisms die eventually. That is, in fact, part of being alive in the first place.

A fetus is a potential adult, but that's not the same thing as "potential human being". You are yet again using the childish notion of "I think a person is someone who looks like THIS stage of development or THAT stage of development."

 

[Mr Natural]

Let me know when we humanoids make an endangered species list and maybe I’ll start to give a shit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Great question. I can't think of any. Can anyone think of any?

More La-Cooter "I have no real thoughts or arguments" bullshit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Some food for thought...

I Had An Illegal Abortion Before Roe v. Wade. This Is Why Women Of My Generation Must Share Our Stories.

More La-Cooter "I have no real thoughts or arguments" bullshit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

Your biggest problem you have, is understanding your own publication. I already linked the definition of "life" to you through Wikipedia. What your publication is offering to you is this, that the zygote/embryo/ fetus will develop into a fully developed human being, while calling it a human being. It still is not a fully developed human being. And that is what you struggle to understand.You are simply desperate to inject an argument for your desired narrative, when you fail to understand the totality of the meanings from your own publications that you post. You don't get it, because you don't want to get it. You want to call it a human being? Knock yourself out. But even your own publication does not do that. You need to know how to understand the difference between a developing hb and a fully developed human being. Which is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you.

There you go again, using that ridiculous phrase "fully developed human being" which just shows that you STILL don't get it, and you're still putting forth your own confused ideas as fact.

No, the quotes are clear. They're all saying basically the same thing: human life begins at conception. There are numerous different stages of life - but in each of those stages, you have a genetically unique individual, living human being. And I didn't post a "publication" - I posted a variety of quotes, from different people, quotes from medical textbooks.

Again, a zygote or embryo is not supposed to look like a newborn or a child, it looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life.

It's getting boring trying to discuss this with you, because you're being repetitive, ignoring quotes from scientists and medical textbooks, and putting forth your own confused, politically-driven misguided ideas as fact.

Your premise, that the fetus "looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life", is utterly false. It's not a "human being", until it's sentient, aware, and able to breathe on its own.

Fully 1/3 of all pregnancies end in miscarriage or "spontaneous abortion". A fetus is NOT a human being. It's a potential human being, and a lot of stuff has to go right for that little zygote to make it as a fully formed human being.



Unless and until the

In your politically-driven, misguided, unscientific opinion. Honestly, to deny that the preborn is a human makes you look ignorant, I'm trying to help you here:


“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

*********

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D., the first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization, from Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40

*********

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:


*********

“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

*********

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

*********

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

*********


National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization” 11/18/13

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

*********



Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144
“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”
Quoted in Randy Alcorn “Pro-life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments” (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2000)

*********


“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55

*********

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”

*********

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3
“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”

*********

Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943

“Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism…. At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun. ”

*********

Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”

*********

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, [at conception] the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

*********

“The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”

Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.

congrats to you...

This is the exact moment Dud admitted he had no real arguments and fell back on childish lies and insults.