When does science claim at what point does a New Human Life begin

Mar 2019
105
36
USA
#31
If conservatives believe life begins at conception, then why aren't they going after in vitro fertilization?
1.7 Million Human Embryos Created for IVF Thrown Away | Center for Genetics and Society
Approximately one million embryos currently frozen and could easily be destroyed at any time.

Why aren't right-wing conservatives up in arms over this situation?
As a Christian, your point I'd happen to partially agree with, though believe the example isn't exact. I've always had a problem with this "right wing, conservative Christian" concept that scripture is to rule the world, as, the bottom line fact of the matter, scripture, beyond the basic gospel message, is only for the faithful and obedient. Scripture is very explicit the kingdom of God is a matter of the Spirit, not of this world, that, in fact, the current world of the flesh and the devil will only be just when the Lord sweeps it clean. Neither is Christianity even Judaism, some list of codes to live by that can't save anybody, Ephesians 2:8-9.

America could be a nation with all citizens prosperous, behind white picket fences, abortion illegal and near nobody wanting one, all free to watch a lifetime of football or Dancing with the Stars in security, that throw a few bucks in the offering plate Sundays, that stuck the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn, and all these law abiders on their way to hell.

The primary issue, the only issue, has never been the law, in a wicked world. How many realize that God never even gave the Old Testament, that bastion of law, to anybody, but Israel? The issue is the wickedness of unregenerate mankind, across the board. If the abortion issue would be resolved, according to the self-righteous, or any such issue, this alone would spare no soul from hell.

THE issue is what a person does with the blood of Jesus Christ, whether man repents, broken at the foot of the cross by their sin guilt, and receives the risen Christ in spirit and in truth, as his Lord, that is, Master, or rejects that gospel. This is the issue. Even an unbeliever or fake Christian that would never abort a baby? This fact alone saves nobody. The real issue for all is eternal. I'd heartily agree that I, at least, am not about trying to make a world right that is written down for destruction, the most important issue, "What are you going to do about Jesus Christ?" Though conservative, I'd not fight abortion for two seconds, if there was anybody that needed the gospel and salvation, first. Here's what I believe:

Revelation 12:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

How will the issues of the sinful world, of the flesh and the devil be resolved?

Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Luke 17:26-30 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

What is critically important, to each and every human being?

1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

John 3:5-8 Jesus answered, Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, You must be born again. The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.

If the "conservative Christian" thinks he has accomplished anything eternal, by codifying more law, painting picket fences whiter, that and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee and hell. The issue is what each soul does with the gospel of Jesus Christ. If all had that gospel, were of the Holy Spirit, there would very little sin of any stripe.

Here's what the Lord Jesus had to say to the very most law abiding of His time, walking this earth:

Matthew 23:25-26 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also.

If the inside of man is not cleansed of spiritual darkness, evil continues to reign in the heart of the most upright citizens of the world.

The Scribes and Pharisees, too. would have made a point to perhaps even such as stone an abortionist, yet had no problem murdering the innocent Lord Jesus. Likewise, if you stamped-out abortion, no soul would have been saved, for eternity.

Matthew 23:24 Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

Let the lawmakers make law, Luke 20:25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's. The mission of the believer is the presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ and see to their own obedience. The damned aren't obedient in the first place, and you're never going to make the unbelieving world holy, period. The office of the Holy Spirit is a little above the pay grade of the so-called "conservative, right wing Christian."

Incidentally, human life, in God’s economy, begins when one is born of the Spirit. Otherwise, all are simply dead men walking,

Ephesians 2:1-2 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.

Matthew 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
 
Likes: dadmansabode
Sep 2015
420
57
USA
#32
It’s already been pointed out to you that the “American College of Pediatricians” is a conservative social issues group pretending to be a medical group and yet here you are pushing their BS again.

I guess Nwolfie needs to go do his own google search .... lol, let me know what you find about the origin of a new Human Life
 
Likes: OrangeOrb
Mar 2019
105
36
USA
#33
Where did I claim this ??

life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested < indeed it is
Well, now, this is open for debate. According to Nimnuts the Great, those sperm and eggs got Big Banged from nothing, and for no reason, male and female at that, this where life began. That banging out male and female, self-replicating primordial slime matter, from nothing, and for no reason? Not even a tooth fairy could do that!
 
Likes: dadmansabode
Sep 2015
420
57
USA
#34
Incidentally, human life, in God’s economy, begins when one is born of the Spirit. Otherwise, all are simply dead men walking, < amen and amen
Well, now, this is open for debate. According to Nimnuts the Great, those sperm and eggs got Big Banged from nothing, and for no reason, male and female at that, this where life began. That banging out male and female, self-replicating primordial slime matter, from nothing, and for no reason? Not even a tooth fairy could do that!
Nimnuts the Great / self-replicating primordial slime matter .. OmG !!! you're killn me ..... welcome aboard Orb
 
Last edited:
Likes: OrangeOrb
Sep 2015
420
57
USA
#35
did it get quiet in here ? .... maybe we should just tell Nimnuts the Great / goober / imaginethat / hoosier88 / foundit66 and iolo
to go and sin no more ? .. or maybe to go and pound sand .... either way, we got NOTHING but theory from these 'candle holders of science' < typical
 
Last edited:
Likes: OrangeOrb
Mar 2019
105
36
USA
#36
did it get quiet in here ? .... maybe we should just tell Nimnuts the Great / goober / imaginethat / hoosier88 / foundit66 / iolo
to go and sin no more ? .. or maybe to go and pound sand
Sounds good to me! In the first case, throw in faith in our Lord Jesus, and we'd have people that won't spend a mighty long time, wishing they had a drop of water on their tongue, Luke 16. In the latter case, they could at least leave some concrete behind, before they drop into hell. Best shot is probably the sand works.
 
Likes: dadmansabode
Feb 2007
5,447
3,041
USA
#37
“Our approach is to look at both adult and fetus as a biologist would: as parts of a complex and interconnected web of living things on our planet. Instead of asking about how a fetus resembles an adult human, we propose to ask how both of them differ from other living things, what it is that makes them uniquely human, and then to use this information in coming to policy decisions. Over the years, scientists have developed new understandings about life on our planet and about the nature of Homo sapiens. A good deal of this understanding has come since the original Roe decision and, to our knowledge, has been largely ignored in the ensuing debate. It shouldn’t be.

This is not to say that the abortion debate can be reduced, in the end, to a question of scientific fact. It can’t. Neither, however, can the debate be conducted intelligently if one ignores what scientists have learned about human beings and about the process by which a single fertilized egg develops into a newborn child. This truth is nowhere more evident than when legislators trying to grapple with the abortion issue turn to the scientific community and ask, “When does an individual life begin?”

This is not only the wrong question, it is a question that cannot be answered by use of methods of science. Any scientist who says it can either doesn’t understand the limits of our craft, has defined “life” in a way that he or she hasn’t made explicit, or is trying to be deceptive. We’ve seen examples of all three sources of error behind “scientific” answers to this question, by people on both sides of the abortion debate.

This question is sometimes confused with one that is more specifically biological: “When does life in general begin?” meaning, “When did living things first appear on the earth?” This more general question can, of course, be approached with the methods of science, although the fact of the matter is that life is one of those terms (like time) that scientists are usually quite content to use in a loose, colloquial way, but that they find extraordinary difficult to define with precision.

In the context of the abortion debate, life clearly means “the life of an individual.” So “When does life begin?” is still the wrong question. The only way we can define individual life is by making a list of the characteristics of an individual life and then seeing if the entity in question shares them. The only rational answer a biologist can give to the question “When does an individual life begin?” is to say, “Tell me what you mean by individual life, and I’ll tell you if this entity has it.” A biologist, in other words, cannot provide a definition of individual life (at least as that term is used in the abortion debate) solely from the biological sciences. He or she must go outside science for those sorts of definitions. For example, a geneticist can tell you that at conception a new combination of preexisting DNA has come into existence, but whether “life” has begun simply cannot be resolved by this information. This type of answer is profoundly unsatisfying, but it’s about all you can expect if you ask the wrong question.”


"The Facts of Life"
Harold J. Morowitz and James S. Trefil

:rolleyes:


Moreover, when a single fertilized human cell eventually divides to become two cells, and the DNA in that new second cell mutates during that mitotic process so that it carries a unique combination of DNA, how many human "lives" are there in that collection of cells? (Indeed, such mutations can and sometimes do occur during the process of mitotic cell division.)

If the answer to this question by some people is only one life exists, then they simply can't claim that a unique combination of DNA is the deciding factor of what should be considered new human life.

And, if the answer to this question by some people is two lives exist, then they simply cannot claim that the act of fertilization is the sole deciding factor concerning what should be considered new human life. (Indeed, even the original parent fertilized cell's DNA is subject to change due to mutagens that effect it outside the process of mitotic cell division.)

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Likes: catus felis
Jul 2008
18,533
12,263
Virginia Beach, VA
#38
did it get quiet in here ? .... maybe we should just tell Nimnuts the Great / goober / imaginethat / hoosier88 / foundit66 and iolo
to go and sin no more ? .. or maybe to go and pound sand .... either way, we got NOTHING but theory from these 'candle holders of science' < typical
Once again showing how you do not understand science.

In your own words, tell us what a theory is in science.
 
Sep 2015
420
57
USA
#40
“When does life in general begin?” meaning, “When did living things first appear on the earth?”
Uhm, no ... that's not the subject of this thread .... the SUBJECT is ... (ie: YOU) when did YOU begin as a new Human Life < science only / not your 'opinion'

Nwolfe35 = Prior to the third trimester the fetus does not have a developed nervous system in order to feel pain. It is not a human being with rights

would you Mr detector like to set him straight .... we'll see