Who do people think zygotes and embryo are people?

Question

It seems to me that chips have more qualification for personhood than zygotes or embryo.

Just because they have the potential to develop into people does not mean that they *are* people. I never see someone look at an egg and call it a chicken.

I am not trying to start a fight. If you have a strong emotional reaction to this question, try asking yourself why you react that way.

Those of you who answer 'Because they are life', are you vegitarians? Animal rights activists?
Cause animals are life too.

button21:
When I was a zygote the person I know as 'me' did not yet exist. So I guess the answer is yes.
(Actually, the person I am now also did not exist 10 years ago--cause what happened in those 10 years shaped who I am today. I am 26 years old, btw.)

Answer 1

AMEN! You have totally hit upon something here. I especially agree with the egg analogy. (Except some people do protest eating eggs. Vegans do.)

However, I think that the fanatical people who are reluctant to relent on the human zygote debate are afraid of falling down the slippery slope. Their argument seems to be the "where do we draw the line" argument. If we allow this, then what's to stop us from allowing the line to move further in that direction? It's a ridiculous argument. Move the line where it belongs and keep it.

One last thing, can you tell me, where DOES it belong?

Answer 2

Okay, the reasoning for this is because an embryo (a gathering of human cells already attached to the uterine wall) will become a human if the pregnancy is carried out fully. And zygotes have the potential to develop but first must attach to the uterine wall. So from a scientific stand point an embryo already carries out the essential life functions (respiration, ingestion, excretion, etc.) and therefore is already a living creature. Just as a developing chick inside of an egg carries out these processes and is considered a living creature but is inside of an egg and most people are either ignorant to that fact or cannot grasp the concept, therefore making the egg itself nothing more than a portable uterus, however the developing chick is a living creature as soon as it starts the life functions.

Answer 3

I think the problem is that most people do not understand what a zygote is. It comes down to a lack of education accompanied by unrealistic religious beliefs. The problem here is that by continuing stem cell research we will be able to save millions of lives in the future whereas stopping the research is really saving no one. Even if the zygote was a human being it would be a seriously small price considering the great gain. From what I understand the zygotes are taken from embryos that were no going to grow anyway. Some people here will no doubt mention their children and their ultra-sound, blah, blah, blah. That's all well and good but it's not like they're stealing your babies to do the research. The zygotes can be taken from embryos that were going to be discarded anyway for one reason or another. When your little baby you saw in the ultra sound grows up and gets heart or liver disease at a young age and needs a perfect replacement liver or heart you'd be damn glad the stem cell people grew one for you. We need to step back and see the bigger picture here. We could cure many diseases that are killing millions of young children and adults every day.

It's funny how it's OK to sacrifice the lives of American soldiers (actual real living people) in a war founded on a bunch of lies, but when we sacrifice a cell that "could" maybe one day turn into a human everyone freaks out. Who's really being moral here?

Answer 4

I had children through in vitro fertilization. In the course of doing that, we created a number of additional fertilized embryos that were never used. Had we not created those fertilized embryos we would not have the two beautiful children we have today. But having gone through that process, I know there is a lot more that the embryo has to go through to develop into a human being. The embryo has to be implanted in a uterus, the uterus has to accept the embryo, the person carrying the embryo has to not have a miscarriage, the embryo has to develop into a fetus, and the fetus has to be born. The embryo sitting in a dish is not a person, and is very far from becoming a person. That is why it is ridiculous not to use these unneeded embryos for research. They are not people. The fact that people are allowed to discard these unwanted embryos, and cannot be forced to try to implant them in their own or someone else's uterus proves that we do not consider them to be human beings. I do not cry over the unrealized potential of my unused embryos any more than I would cry over the unrealized potential of the millions of sperm that die whenever I have a wet dream.

The reason that people consider these embryos to be people is that they do not know where else to draw the line. Granted that it is difficult to determine the precise moment at which a fetus becomes a human being, that does not require us to consider a newly-fertilized egg to be a human being.

Answer 5

If I asked my self why I feel strongly about this question. My answer would be my sons first ultrasound. I was already pro-life but when I saw his Little heart beating I became even more pro- life. A fertile egg is a chicken, A tad poll is a frog, and a embryo is a live baby.

Answer 6

You are right, person is a being individual and capable of sustenting its own physiology. Embryos are not independent from maternal blood supply, and are not fully developed yet.
Yes, also, a chimpanzee is more like a person, than a human embryo.
Even in the best scenarario, a human embryo has a chance of living up to birth date of less than 50%.

Answer 7

Most everything is based from religion. In most christian religions it is the common belief that the soul is born the instant that an egg is fertilized and the baby begins to grow. I can see how that could be possible because from day no. 1 an infant has a personality all his or her own. So people are against abortion and call it murder because they believe you are killing a soul that has been born.

Answer 8

Because an embryo *is* just as much a human being as anyone else. The argument that they arn't human beings because they are dependant on the mother is illogical nonsence. If we followed that argument to the logical conclusion it would mean that children are also sub-human because of *their* dependence on their parents. And what about those people who are mentally ill, retarded, severely ill, injured, elderly, etc... Those people are also dependant on other humans for their basic survival so we would again have to call them sub-human.

Chicken eggs that we buy at the store are unfertilized.

Answer 9

well an egg is not going to be a chicken nessesarily. an egg still has to be fertalized by a roster. but a zygote and an embryo have everything they need. all they need is time to grow. you were once an embryo. and befor that you were a zygote.

Answer 10

zygotes and embryo are not people, they are life. the question morally is - do they have souls?
since no one knows, they say be safe and say yes so that incase they do then you are safe, if they dont, then no harm no foul.
what "they" dont understand is that there may be serious harm and foul to the mother / father or others who definately have souls.
so do you save what may be a life? even if you destroy a known life?

Answer 11

You're just looking for a fight.......*Sigh* Can't you find a happier topic or is this something you really want to know about?

In short:
Because the 'potential' is there, some people believe that you should not snuff out a life before it's had the opportunity to reach it's maximum potential. (i.e. Playing God.)