Why are embryos children?

Question

The entire argument against abortion seems to hinge on the idea that an embryo, no matter how small, is an actual human being. Anti-abortionists consistently refer to human embryos as babies, children, and people. I have great trouble understanding or accepting the idea that a clump of two, four, eight, or even 4000 cells can even be called a "baby", or that a blastocyst has the same legal rights as I do. Or that when I was a blastocyst, I had the same legal rights as my mother, etc.

Incidentally, please don't educate me on the Christian doctrine that "all human life begins at conception"; I'm quite aware of it, and it has no place in a discussion regarding the public domain. Try to use arguments that will make sense to people outside your faith; if you plan on living in a secular democracy, it's what you have to do.

It looks as though the "Beating heart" argument has started; if you would like to use this argument, please explain how a beating heart justifies an embryo being called a child. The heart's function is to circulate nutrients to aid development, nothing more. Tumors also sometimes have a "pulse", or similar function.

Catintrepid; "all human life begins at conception" is a baseless religious opinion which cannot be tested, wheras 2+2=4 is a well-documented proven mathematical fact that CAN be tested.
If you are going to tell me that these are the same thing, I suggest you do some serious thinking regarding how you treat your faith, because what you are doing right now is sheer stupid stubborness, and there are more intelligent ways of doing it.

keith: if you want me to answer your questions, please contact me personally on AIM. I can't answer your questions here because its very inconvenient.

Sarge: you need to prove your statements. Saying its just "wrong" isnt convincing.
As for "it's alive", "murder something with a beating heart", are you guys vegetarians or something? Otherwise, think of a better argument. I don't think that having a beating heart is anything special. An ebryo doesn't keep me alive anymore than a tumor does; I keep MYSELF alive. If an embryo cannot survive without me as a life-support system, that means it is a part of my body, to cut away or keep as I please.

Answer 1

becuz they aren't aliens

Answer 2

At what point does life begin? Conception, with the first beat of a heart, when the first breath of air is taken?

I think life begins when growth begins, which is at the moment of conception. The egg and sperm have united and, if given the proper time and nourishment, will transform into a tiny human that is capable of survival outside of the uterus. Is it right to deny a "would-be" human the environment it needs to obtain such a status? After all, no one can deny that the end result of a successful pregnancy is a baby, a human, a living, breathing homo sapien.

We call bacteria and other single-celled organisms alive and we speak of killing them. Why do we refuse to call something that has more cells and is growing, tissue? Why don't we call terminating the process of growth in an unborn human, killing? Is it because we don't want to see that there is life in the process?

My ob/gyn has always refer ed to the growing thing in my belly as a baby. Doctors often refer to embryos and fetuses as babies, unless they are performing abortions. Then they use terms like tissue. A rose is a rose, no matter what you call it. People have abortions because they don't want a baby, not because they don't want tissue. If they don't have an abortion then they will, in fact, end up with a baby.

What right do we have to deny life to an unborn human? Do we have the capability of judging whether or not that "thing" that still needs a womb deserves a chance at breath... at life outside?

I think, as humans, we make up fancy words and come up with fancy ways of deceiving ourselves into believing that we aren't selfish beings. We take it upon ourselves to impose our own theories and opinions on those who haven't had a chance to know what this world has to offer them.....

Answer 3

So where would be the dividing line? At what point do we say that this is person?
Abortion in my eyes is a convenience, and I am against it.
Education and birth control are the responsibilities of each and every one of us. If you do not want a child, take measures to prevent it.

I just can't see why so many cannot see adoption as a viable solution. Many people cannot have children and want a child.

Answer 4

I feel it should be called a baby, child when it's heart starts beating.

I mean isn't it murder if you kill something with a beating heart???

If you go to jail for murdering someone... it should be the same for a living breathing human in it's mother's womb!

Ahhh yes but can a tumor keep you alive???

What if someone cut's out your heart like they do a tumor???
Do you think you will keep on living???

And you didn't answer my questions!!!

Oops i wonder why? LOL

Answer 5

The fact that you don't accept or wish to be governed by the doctrine that all human life begins at conception doesn't mean that it doesn't.

2 + 2 = 4 . It doesn't matter if I want to believe that's true or not, or whether I think it's fair to impose mathematical doctrine on others, it still is.

Similarly, human life begins at conception, when that person's irreplaceable and unique DNA has combined and his/her soul has been given to him, no matter who wishes to believe it or not, it simply is true.

Answer 6

embryos are not children. however when a fetus is physically able to exist outside the womb it becomes a person. premature infants that gestated 5 months survive all the time now. If it cant sustain brain or bodily function outside the womb as far as I am concerned it isn't a person it is just tissue, a growth, nothing more.

Answer 7

If you're just trying to justify abortion, you can come up with all kinds of baloney. The bottom line is it's wrong.

Answer 8

Because their alive.

Answer 9

If you don't want babies(tumors), just don't have one.