<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When does science say Human Life begins?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/</link>
	<description>A Catholic Social Commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 17:58:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102622</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:04:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102622</guid>
		<description>Its not a person. Every thing that makes you, you, is your brain. How can you even argue that a person is a person before the brain develops? Also people are capable of living outside of the mothers womb. Zygotes and embryos aren&#039;t.

Brain dead people are dead, just because a machine can keep your organs working doesn&#039;t mean you are a person any more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its not a person. Every thing that makes you, you, is your brain. How can you even argue that a person is a person before the brain develops? Also people are capable of living outside of the mothers womb. Zygotes and embryos aren&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Brain dead people are dead, just because a machine can keep your organs working doesn&#8217;t mean you are a person any more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102621</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102621</guid>
		<description>Your arguing nonsense, if you read what I said, when a human becomes viable to live outside of the womb, then its to late for the mother to abort. It happens at about 22-24 weeks.

Some people want life to start at the start of the menstrual cycle, so its a &quot;life&quot; before its even fertilized. So I dismiss those nonsense arguments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your arguing nonsense, if you read what I said, when a human becomes viable to live outside of the womb, then its to late for the mother to abort. It happens at about 22-24 weeks.</p>
<p>Some people want life to start at the start of the menstrual cycle, so its a &#8220;life&#8221; before its even fertilized. So I dismiss those nonsense arguments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102617</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102617</guid>
		<description>Is a constant blood transfusion required for a child of 30 days or 3 years? No</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is a constant blood transfusion required for a child of 30 days or 3 years? No</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102613</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102613</guid>
		<description>Jason, you sound a lot like the folks who argue that it is ok to kill children up to the age of 30 days, or even three years, because they can&#039;t survive on their own. You&#039;re on a very slippery slope.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason, you sound a lot like the folks who argue that it is ok to kill children up to the age of 30 days, or even three years, because they can&#8217;t survive on their own. You&#8217;re on a very slippery slope.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102612</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102612</guid>
		<description>cesar,

The discussion about abortion need not depend on the existence of the soul at all, or on religious belief. Many atheists are pro-life, and they certainly don&#039;t believe in souls or in religion. The ethical treatment of human beings, including those in the womb, is about respect for life, and in particular about the obligation to protect innocent life. 

Scientists agree that a human embryo, even when a zygote, is human. It isn&#039;t a dog or a cow or a fish or an insect, planaria, or sponge. It can only be human, and since it is living, it is a human life.

Your argument is full of apparently unexamined presuppositions -- about what life is, about what other people believe, about what is acceptable conduct. I can only hope that you come to understand that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cesar,</p>
<p>The discussion about abortion need not depend on the existence of the soul at all, or on religious belief. Many atheists are pro-life, and they certainly don&#8217;t believe in souls or in religion. The ethical treatment of human beings, including those in the womb, is about respect for life, and in particular about the obligation to protect innocent life. </p>
<p>Scientists agree that a human embryo, even when a zygote, is human. It isn&#8217;t a dog or a cow or a fish or an insect, planaria, or sponge. It can only be human, and since it is living, it is a human life.</p>
<p>Your argument is full of apparently unexamined presuppositions &#8212; about what life is, about what other people believe, about what is acceptable conduct. I can only hope that you come to understand that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102611</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102611</guid>
		<description>Words have meaning and you sir are warping the words to suit your needs.

self-directing:
Directing or guiding oneself, especially as an independent agent.

That&#039;s what the word means, an embryo, zygote, or egg does not fit those things, it doesn&#039;t have a brain capable of thought, and its defiantly NOT independent 

independent - free from external control and constraint

a skin cell isn&#039;t a human, a brain cell isn&#039;t a human

An embryo and zygote are both parasites of the mother. 

You say it &quot;just needs food&quot; and &quot;proper shelter&quot; and It also need a lot more from the mother, it is incapable of surviving even a few minutes outside of the womb. 

The umbilical cord transfers blood that that it needs if you cut the parasitic tie to the mother the organism dies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Words have meaning and you sir are warping the words to suit your needs.</p>
<p>self-directing:<br />
Directing or guiding oneself, especially as an independent agent.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s what the word means, an embryo, zygote, or egg does not fit those things, it doesn&#8217;t have a brain capable of thought, and its defiantly NOT independent </p>
<p>independent &#8211; free from external control and constraint</p>
<p>a skin cell isn&#8217;t a human, a brain cell isn&#8217;t a human</p>
<p>An embryo and zygote are both parasites of the mother. </p>
<p>You say it &#8220;just needs food&#8221; and &#8220;proper shelter&#8221; and It also need a lot more from the mother, it is incapable of surviving even a few minutes outside of the womb. </p>
<p>The umbilical cord transfers blood that that it needs if you cut the parasitic tie to the mother the organism dies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cesar</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102601</link>
		<dc:creator>cesar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:42:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102601</guid>
		<description>@Matthew, you may talk about a human zygote as encompassing the potential (DNA, etc) for human life but the issue with abortion concerns another matter, that of the &quot;soul&quot; in the context of Catholicism. While I&#039;m sure you believe in a soul, many do not take that leap of faith. So the choice to terminate a developing zygote is really arbitrary.  The &quot;definition&quot; of when human life begins is very much still debatable. But even if you define the start of human life at conception, its a choice left to bring that human to full term; no doubt a difficult choice but one that can be made without repercussion unless you believe that a soul truly embodies that life. Ending human life is not a reproachable act, we do it all the time in war, in self-defense, in mercy - it only becomes a dilemma when you buy in to a religious view that imposes morality around terminating human life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Matthew, you may talk about a human zygote as encompassing the potential (DNA, etc) for human life but the issue with abortion concerns another matter, that of the &#8220;soul&#8221; in the context of Catholicism. While I&#8217;m sure you believe in a soul, many do not take that leap of faith. So the choice to terminate a developing zygote is really arbitrary.  The &#8220;definition&#8221; of when human life begins is very much still debatable. But even if you define the start of human life at conception, its a choice left to bring that human to full term; no doubt a difficult choice but one that can be made without repercussion unless you believe that a soul truly embodies that life. Ending human life is not a reproachable act, we do it all the time in war, in self-defense, in mercy &#8211; it only becomes a dilemma when you buy in to a religious view that imposes morality around terminating human life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Warner</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-102597</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Warner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-102597</guid>
		<description>Jason - you should look into the science a bit more. The terms you are make it hard to have a conversation about them when the definitions you are using seem fairly arbitrary and not in agreement with established science and definition. Cells are absolutely of a &quot;kind&quot; ie human or dog or whatever they are made of. They are made of DNA for a specific type of organism. So humans are made of human cells and human DNA. So your sentence there doesn&#039;t make sense. 

Being able to &quot;live outside of a womb&quot; is not any part of what makes a particular organism human or not. It has nothing to do with it.

And the brain is not the only &quot;self-directing&quot; thing in a human. Of course, even a single cell directs itself. And early on, the fertilized human egg has all of the information, instructions and self-direction to grow into an adult human. He/she just needs food (nutrition) and proper shelter (womb) - BOTH things that EVERY human needs, regardless of their stage in life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jason &#8211; you should look into the science a bit more. The terms you are make it hard to have a conversation about them when the definitions you are using seem fairly arbitrary and not in agreement with established science and definition. Cells are absolutely of a &#8220;kind&#8221; ie human or dog or whatever they are made of. They are made of DNA for a specific type of organism. So humans are made of human cells and human DNA. So your sentence there doesn&#8217;t make sense. </p>
<p>Being able to &#8220;live outside of a womb&#8221; is not any part of what makes a particular organism human or not. It has nothing to do with it.</p>
<p>And the brain is not the only &#8220;self-directing&#8221; thing in a human. Of course, even a single cell directs itself. And early on, the fertilized human egg has all of the information, instructions and self-direction to grow into an adult human. He/she just needs food (nutrition) and proper shelter (womb) &#8211; BOTH things that EVERY human needs, regardless of their stage in life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-101550</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-101550</guid>
		<description>A Cell isnt human. A human Is a fully developed baby that can live outside of the womb. That happens at about 24ish weeks (all babies are different.) 

An embryo isn&#039;t human, zygote isn&#039;t human, an egg isn&#039;t human, a cell isn&#039;t human. I cant take any of those things outside of the mother and have it survive. Sorry it is not a &quot;self-directing organism.&quot; Its head doesn&#039;t develop till week 7 so how can its brain function to support self-directing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Cell isnt human. A human Is a fully developed baby that can live outside of the womb. That happens at about 24ish weeks (all babies are different.) </p>
<p>An embryo isn&#8217;t human, zygote isn&#8217;t human, an egg isn&#8217;t human, a cell isn&#8217;t human. I cant take any of those things outside of the mother and have it survive. Sorry it is not a &#8220;self-directing organism.&#8221; Its head doesn&#8217;t develop till week 7 so how can its brain function to support self-directing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Warner</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-96313</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Warner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 05:11:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-96313</guid>
		<description>Tim - you aren&#039;t being precise enough so your analogy doesn&#039;t make sense.

An embryo is a complete human life. It is an individual, unique, self-directing organism. All it needs is food and suitable shelter (just like the rest of us) and it will grow into an adult human being.

I want to be clear though. Technically, some consider a zygote (fertilized human egg) to be a &quot;stem cell&quot; as it&#039;s totipotent (and eventually grows into an adult human).

But the stem cells I assume you are referring to are the embryonic/adult ones used for testing, etc...which are either pluripotent or multipotent - meaning that they can not ever form into their own organism. They are biologically very different and are a kind of cell that comes from the human organism itself. So no, they are not human persons by themselves. And no, it is not murder to &quot;kill&quot; such a stem cell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim &#8211; you aren&#8217;t being precise enough so your analogy doesn&#8217;t make sense.</p>
<p>An embryo is a complete human life. It is an individual, unique, self-directing organism. All it needs is food and suitable shelter (just like the rest of us) and it will grow into an adult human being.</p>
<p>I want to be clear though. Technically, some consider a zygote (fertilized human egg) to be a &#8220;stem cell&#8221; as it&#8217;s totipotent (and eventually grows into an adult human).</p>
<p>But the stem cells I assume you are referring to are the embryonic/adult ones used for testing, etc&#8230;which are either pluripotent or multipotent &#8211; meaning that they can not ever form into their own organism. They are biologically very different and are a kind of cell that comes from the human organism itself. So no, they are not human persons by themselves. And no, it is not murder to &#8220;kill&#8221; such a stem cell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/when-does-science-say-human-life-begins/comment-page-1/#comment-94904</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Mar 2012 02:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fallibleblogma.com/?p=1527#comment-94904</guid>
		<description>It seems obvious that at conception the embrio has potential of becoming a full-blown human being.  But so does a stem cell.  Does that make stem cells human persons?  And if so, as human persons, is it murder to &quot;kill&quot; a stem cell?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems obvious that at conception the embrio has potential of becoming a full-blown human being.  But so does a stem cell.  Does that make stem cells human persons?  And if so, as human persons, is it murder to &#8220;kill&#8221; a stem cell?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

