When are embryos first alive?

[LittleWyvern]

Inspired by recent threads on abortion, I wanted to go deeper into the philosophy of the issue and see how people define life via this question. Have fun!

[Maxel]

For me, the issue of abortion isn't so much about the issue of taking a human life as it is about avoiding personal responsibility. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, then she shouldn't have sex. In cases where the woman is wanting to have a child and there are legitimate medical complications that endanger the mother's and/or baby's life, then abortion is a morally viable option. I think, in cases of rape, abortion can again be seen as a morally viable option.

[LittleWyvern]

For me, the issue of abortion isn't so much about the issue of taking a human life as it is about avoiding personal responsibility. If a woman doesn't want to have a child, then she shouldn't have sex. In cases where the woman is wanting to have a child and there are legitimate medical complications that endanger the mother's and/or baby's life, then abortion is a morally viable option. I think, in cases of rape, abortion can again be seen as a morally viable option.

That's a good point. I think women do indeed have a right to choose, but this choice should be made before sex. I support abortion when the woman never chose to get pregnant, or when somebody chose for her.

However, the argument that abortion = murder depends a lot on a person's answer to this question.

[JohnnyRudick]

Inspired by recent threads on abortion, I wanted to go deeper into the philosophy of the issue and see how people define life via this question. Have fun!

Maybe the question should be something closer to "When is the Human Embryo first considered a Human Soul?"

Or maybe

"When do you think the Spirit of a person enters the baby?"

Hummmm, could liven things up a bit maybe?

Bro. Rudick

[Wingnut]

That's a good point. I think women do indeed have a right to choose, but this choice should be made before sex. I support abortion when the woman never chose to get pregnant, or when somebody chose for her.

The Church also supports it when the pregnancy will endanger the mother's life, or when the baby is not expected to live beyond birth.

[Wingnut]

Hummmm, could liven things up a bit maybe?

Not likely. This subject has been discussed ad nauseum, many times over on these forums already (yes, I intended to be redundant).

[LittleWyvern]

Maybe the question should be something closer to "When is the Human Embryo first considered a Human Soul?"

Or maybe

"When do you think the Spirit of a person enters the baby?"

Hummmm, could liven things up a bit maybe?

Bro. Rudick

Wouldn't the answer be exactly the same, theoretically?

[Maureen]

I answered Other. I would say that the embryo is alive when it implants on the uterine wall. This is the only way the embryo could receive oxygen and nutrients from the mother to be able to grow.

M.

[Guest Godless]

I was pretty hasty in adding my answer. In the human sense of the word, an embryo is alive when the heart starts to beat. However, technically it's alive as soon as the first cells are formed, though it's status as human life is certainly debatable at that point.

[JohnnyRudick]

Wouldn't the answer be exactly the same, theoretically?

I was "missing in action" when this was discussed before.

Sorry I missed it.

In some circles it may be considered that the embryo can technically be "alive" yet not be a "soul" as the spirit as some may think, has not yet entered into the "embryo".

Some say that it takes "breath" (Genesis 2:7) as the symbolical presentation showing the entering in of the baby's spirit to make that baby a living soul.

Baby not "breathing" Baby not a "soul" some say.

Just an example.

Bro. Rudick

Edited March 26, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling (keys stiick:)

[deseretgov]

Well technically the cell is alive at fertilization. If it was not the babay could not develop. But I think the question was meant as when does the spirit enter the body.

I selected other. I don't believe the Spirit enters the body of the child until birth. But I also think that the Spirit is often close by during pregnancy. It can influence it's future body. But I think the spirit also leaves to perform other tasks during this time in preparation for it's entry into the world.

[WillowTheWhisp]

I think it mut be at least several months before birth because the unborn John the Baptist recognied that the baby Mary was carying was our Saviour.

[MarginOfError]

I had to select "Other" simply because I do not know. Nor do I care, really. I've got better things to invest my time in.

[WillowTheWhisp]

But you did invest time!

[JohnnyRudick]

Well technically the cell is alive at fertilization. If it was not the babay could not develop. But I think the question was meant as when does the spirit enter the body.

I selected other. I don't believe the Spirit enters the body of the child until birth. But I also think that the Spirit is often close by during pregnancy. It can influence it's future body. But I think the spirit also leaves to perform other tasks during this time in preparation for it's entry into the world.

Good point and a good answer but I am not so sure.

I don't know, but I am not so sure.

Quite a dilemma.

A few thoughts.

It is not like, "When and How is a person "saved"?

Where we have Scriptural instruction.

Don't want to error on the wrong side on such an important subject.

We know that "Life is in the Blood".

Leviticus 17:10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of

Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth

any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul

that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and

I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for

your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the

soul.

So I lean toward the opinion that since the Mother provides hher blood in the beginning to the attached egg (or does she?) He receives "life" from her.

The "Life" force is in the Oxygen" that is in the blood.

"Breath of Life"

Soooooo, does the Baby have to take the first breath?

I don't know.

But it is a scary thought that maybe that the life force is already in live blood.

Is it the Mother's life force or is it the baby's?

I don't know:confused:

Can the baby get Oxygen from the mother to feed the Baby's own blood or does the Baby have it's own or does it need to take the first breath to get it's own?

I would save all baby's if I could from the time of conception unless the mother's life was in danger.

I don't mean she is "depressed" but actually in danger of dieing.

There is never that chance in a "late term abortion" that I have ever heard of that the mother is in danger of dieing.

That is just a "straw man" that they throw out there to justify the horrendous attack on the baby.

Almost all of those to the letter are abortions of convenience.

Note also, there is a commercial enterprise ramping up to justify the creation of human embryos for scientific experimentation.

There is no humane reason for this other then the development of Nazi type experimentation.

The question, "When does "life" began for humans" is used by these people as a tool to wear us down to accepting these experiments. Beware!

I personally believe that weather we (humans) understand it or not, these are human sacrifices for spiritual mischief. (another topic)

Bro. Rudick

[Just_A_Guy]

I think you need another option: Implantation. As I understand it, several methods of birth control don't block fertilization; they just keep the fertilized egg from implanting into the lining of the uterus and beginning to receive the needed nutrients.

Personally, I voted "other" based solely on anecdotal experience of my wife and mother-in-law, both of whom claimed to have been able to feel approximately when the spirit of the child they were carrying entered the body a couple of months into the pregnancy. Of course, I don't expect my own experience to convince anyone else.

My general feeling is that "life" begins later than most ardent pro-lifers think; but earlier than the abortionists would like to believe. Since we don't know for sure, I think abortion at any phase of pregnancy is a dangerous game.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[RangerPrincess]

I think it begins at conception. At that point it has the possibility of becoming a person, and should be considered a living thing. And as several others have stated, since we don't know I would rather err on the extreme side of caution in this case and say it begins at conception.

Having carried three babies, I think its kind of silly to say the spirit doesn't enter the body until birth. You can feel the baby moving, it responds to your voice and to other loved one's voices, responds to music and sounds, and certainly with my three the exhibited parts of their personality even in-utero.

All of that said, I still support the woman's right to choose until the pregnancy is viable and can survive on its own. I personally could not have an abortion because of my beliefs, but I do not think my religious beliefs should dictate other people's actions who believe differently. They will have to face the consequences of their choices.

[foreverafter]

I believe Life begins at conception & should be protected & respected from that day on, as much as any other human being is protected. Most all Christian Churches taught & believed this until the Birth Control pill was introduced & women were offered & lured with an easy quiet way to avoid or end pregancies.

Edited March 26, 2009 by foreverafter

[Just_A_Guy]

Interestingly, a co-worker of mine is a Reform Jew. She stated (and I may be badly misinterpreting this) that there's an old Jewish belief that a baby isn't actually "alive" until the eighth day after it's born--which is why they didn't circumcise until the eighth day. Under Jewish theology (as my co-worker explained it), an abortion at any phase is (forgive the pun) kosher.

(I didn't dare ask her what the implications were for infanticide under that teaching. One day I'll work up the nerve.)

[JohnnyRudick]

I think it begins at conception. At that point it has the possibility of becoming a person, and should be considered a living thing. . . I would rather err on the extreme side of caution in this case and say it begins at conception.

Having carried three babies, I think its kind of silly to say the spirit doesn't enter the body until birth. You can feel the baby moving, it responds to your voice and to other loved one's voices, responds to music and sounds, and certainly with my three the exhibited parts of their personality even in-utero.

All of that said, I still support the woman's right to choose until the pregnancy is viable and can survive on its own. I personally could not have an abortion because of my beliefs, but I do not think my religious beliefs should dictate other people's actions who believe differently. They will have to face the consequences of their choices.

Geese!, and you were doing sooooo, well for a while there too:bawl:

How could you "feel" that way after all you said you believe?

I know we can't do much about what others may choose to do to their babies but. . .

Take that to the old slavery question.

I know you have heard it.

"Well I know that some say that blacks are people too but they are owned by others and are their property.

I personally would not abuse my blacks if I owned one but I cannot find fault with those who do. God will sort it out in the end."

Not sure if I hit the nail square enough on the head here but I tried.

You have your feelings that "this is a baby".

If you believe it is then you have to express your feelings about it when you see a"baby" abused.

You may not physically be able to do anything about it maybe.

But you can express your feelings if you have any and apparently by what you say you believe, you do.

Just because you can't see the child, that don't mean it don't exist.

"If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?"

Bro. Rudick

Edited March 26, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling

[foreverafter]

God has said to set up his laws as the laws of the land. The Constitution is based upon God's laws as Supreme. God has said to not murder. Thus we must protect all life, especially the most innocent of all, from being destroyed by anyone who would do such a thing & punish them if they do. We cannot allow others to break God's laws & hurt the innocent.

If we would stand by these laws today, then we wouldn't have to have all the destructions before Zion was established, but unfortunately very few people will stand up & support God's laws & choose leaders who will uphold such laws. So our destruction is sure.

[JohnnyRudick]

Interestingly, a co-worker of mine is a Reform Jew. She stated (and I may be badly misinterpreting this) that there's an old Jewish belief that a baby isn't actually "alive" until the eighth day after it's born--which is why they didn't circumcise until the eighth day. Under Jewish theology (as my co-worker explained it), an abortion at any phase is (forgive the pun) kosher.

(I didn't dare ask her what the implications were for infanticide under that teaching. One day I'll work up the nerve.)

"I didn't dare ask her what the implications were for infanticide under that teaching."

Good point.

Bro. Rudick

Matthew 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of

the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

Matthew 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also

transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

Mark 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the

tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other

such like things ye do.

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the

commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy

and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments

of the world, and not after Christ.

[Dravin]

Interestingly, a co-worker of mine is a Reform Jew. She stated (and I may be badly misinterpreting this) that there's an old Jewish belief that a baby isn't actually "alive" until the eighth day after it's born--which is why they didn't circumcise until the eighth day. Under Jewish theology (as my co-worker explained it), an abortion at any phase is (forgive the pun) kosher.

It has some value though, under Mosaic Law if I kick a pregnant women in the stomach and a a result she miscarries I'm in trouble, though admittedly not in the same amount as if I'd killed the women:

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

[Just_A_Guy]

My recollection, Dravin, is that she explained that verse in terms of property and not in life. In ancient Israel, children were economic assets to the family either through the income the boys would eventually earn (and the "retirement security" they provided the parents), or the prices the girls would collect when they were married off.

[Dravin]

Sure, one could make the same kind of statement about a car these days, you break it you owe me, you kill me breaking it you go to jail (assuming it isn't an accident) doesn't make it alive. Wasn't trying to argue with her, just saying that it has value, even if just as property.

Of course one has to be a bit more specific than an old Jewish belief. Old can be 200 years, or it could be 2000 years, heck it could be 3500 years ago. Its entirely possible that back when the law was given the beliefs were entirely different than 200 years ago, actually more than possible, probable.