What about the destruction of an unfertilized egg? Does anyone have a problem with this? Scientists have announced that, by stimulating an unfertilized egg, they can create embryonic stem cells. This would be particularly useful for females.
Also some scientists are hoping that they can introduce a DNA-packed nucleus into a non-human embryo (in which the nucleus has been removed) to produce useful human embryonic stem cells.
I think eventually we'll find a means to obtain human embryonic stem cells in a way that makes even the pro-lifers happy.
Lewis
Stem Cell Controversy
What is it, then, that makes the zygote's death "a different sort of activity"?Paidion wrote:Yet, somehow the killing of a mere fertilized human egg seems to be of a different order of activity from the killing of a fully developed baby, even if the latter suffers no pain.
Is there a moral difference between the killing of an infant or a teenager or an adult?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Thank you for the clarification Liseux.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"How is it that Christians today will pay $20 to hear the latest Christian concert, but Jesus can't draw a crowd?"
- Jim Cymbala (Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire) on prayer meetings
- Jim Cymbala (Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire) on prayer meetings
Paidion wrote: "There is a great deal of difference between a zygote and a fully developed human being."
I would agree, but these differences are differences of Degree versus differences of Kind. There is a continuum all the way from a fertilized egg to an aged person about to die. The jump from a sperm (or an unfertilized egg) to a zygote, however, is an entirely different matter. The result of such a union is an entirely separate and new individual. Its dependence on its mother is great but is not different in kind from that of a newborn, which is also very dependent on its mother, only different in degree. Likewise, although it is perhaps more humane to kill an individual in a painless fashion, the individual dies nonetheless. A life is still ended. (For example, if I kill someone in their sleep it will likely be painless)
With respect to a greater degree of guilt by killing a conscious person as opposed to a four to five week embryo, I would entertain this is a possibility. When Christ was talking to Pilate in John 19:11 He said, "You would have no authority over me unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered me up to you has the greater sin."
There do seem to be levels of culpability. Whether this falls into the same category or not I have not decided. One could agrue, for example, that the more helpless and defensless an individual is, the more heinous is the crime.
Paidion wrote: "Indeed a sperm is human life." and later, "Human life is, by definition, that which is human and is alive."
I would agree with the second statement but not the first. A sperm is not "human". A normal human being has 46 chromosomes and a normal sperm has 23. Our genome is what separates us, in a biological sense, from other living creatures. (I would also maintain we are different spiritually from other creatures but that is not what we are discussing here) A sperm comes from a human but is not human by itself. The discussion above contrasted a sperm with an arm or a leg, which were called part of a human but not human by themselves. I think a sperm falls into this same category. It is part of a human but not human by itself. You said that an arm needs to be attached to the person or it will die, while the sperm will continue to live on its own. Actually the arm is made of millions of individual cells, which don't necessarily die immediately when cut off from the person. Fingernails for example, will continue to grow for quite some time (days to weeks) after the person dies. Likewise, the sperm will also die when separated from its "owner". It will only live on its own until it has exhausted the energy it contains. It is no different in this respect from any other cell in our bodies. It is unable to ingest and utilize energy other than what it contains when it is released. This is something that a zygote Will do. Like a third trimester fetus, a newborn, or an adult, the zygote is able to grow and utilize energy in a way that the sperm cannot.
I think this is a very important concept to understand. The zygote is different from me in terms of degree. The sperm is different from me in terms of Kind.
In Him,
Jess W
I would agree, but these differences are differences of Degree versus differences of Kind. There is a continuum all the way from a fertilized egg to an aged person about to die. The jump from a sperm (or an unfertilized egg) to a zygote, however, is an entirely different matter. The result of such a union is an entirely separate and new individual. Its dependence on its mother is great but is not different in kind from that of a newborn, which is also very dependent on its mother, only different in degree. Likewise, although it is perhaps more humane to kill an individual in a painless fashion, the individual dies nonetheless. A life is still ended. (For example, if I kill someone in their sleep it will likely be painless)
With respect to a greater degree of guilt by killing a conscious person as opposed to a four to five week embryo, I would entertain this is a possibility. When Christ was talking to Pilate in John 19:11 He said, "You would have no authority over me unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered me up to you has the greater sin."
There do seem to be levels of culpability. Whether this falls into the same category or not I have not decided. One could agrue, for example, that the more helpless and defensless an individual is, the more heinous is the crime.
Paidion wrote: "Indeed a sperm is human life." and later, "Human life is, by definition, that which is human and is alive."
I would agree with the second statement but not the first. A sperm is not "human". A normal human being has 46 chromosomes and a normal sperm has 23. Our genome is what separates us, in a biological sense, from other living creatures. (I would also maintain we are different spiritually from other creatures but that is not what we are discussing here) A sperm comes from a human but is not human by itself. The discussion above contrasted a sperm with an arm or a leg, which were called part of a human but not human by themselves. I think a sperm falls into this same category. It is part of a human but not human by itself. You said that an arm needs to be attached to the person or it will die, while the sperm will continue to live on its own. Actually the arm is made of millions of individual cells, which don't necessarily die immediately when cut off from the person. Fingernails for example, will continue to grow for quite some time (days to weeks) after the person dies. Likewise, the sperm will also die when separated from its "owner". It will only live on its own until it has exhausted the energy it contains. It is no different in this respect from any other cell in our bodies. It is unable to ingest and utilize energy other than what it contains when it is released. This is something that a zygote Will do. Like a third trimester fetus, a newborn, or an adult, the zygote is able to grow and utilize energy in a way that the sperm cannot.
I think this is a very important concept to understand. The zygote is different from me in terms of degree. The sperm is different from me in terms of Kind.
In Him,
Jess W
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: