Actually, the Bible talks about the "Breath of Life" multiple times. So there's an argument to be made that the Biblical start of human life begins with the first breath.
At the time of the founding of the United States, the general notion was that human life began with "the quickening," meaning when the woman could feel kicking and motion in the womb. And in the late 1700s and early 1800s abortions were known and legal. Ben Franklin even gives a recipe for an abortifacient in one of his books. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/ben-franklin-american-instructor-textbook-abortion-recipe.html
The fact that you can do invitro fertilization and even transplant embryos between species shows that the fertilized egg is indeed its own life form evolving into its adult form. The time spent in the womb is just one phase of life but it is living on its own in its own environment.
SW-User
I'm going to say it's a mommy thing. I love babies and children and don't consider it a religious thing to know that that child wouldn't become any bigger if it weren't already living at the beginning. I become attached to that baby from the beginning...forming a bond before it's born.
Other mothers don't like the child and wish it to be gone... no religion there!
It's not always a religious belief that has people deciding.
It’s not religious since egg and sperm cells weren’t discovered until recently, and conception wasn’t known either. The Bible says life begins with the first breath.
@DailyFlash [quote]separation of church and state[/quote] is to prevent state (federal government) from implementing a state religion (you believe what they tell you to believe or you're outcast as a heretic)
As the Roman & English catholic church did for over 1000 years...
It was [b]never[/b] designed to prevent religious worship within government; please learn some history/historical context before demonstrating any further ignorance...
@DailyFlash so it's just coincidence that God is mentioned four times in the Declaration of Independence, or that more than half the signers held seminary/Bible school degrees? 🤔
So if one started a new religion that defined life as beginning at the start of the second trimester would it be used as a valid legal reference? Which religion is the right one to use?
@Tastyfrzz I don't think religious practice or beliefs should command any special privilege in court, or in taxation - except maybe in the extent to which they make real charity available indiscriminately, to [i][u]any[/u][/i] who need it.
@Slade “ After God formed man in Genesis 2:7, He “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being”. Although the man was fully formed by God in all respects, he was not a living being until after taking his first breath.
In Job 33:4, it states: “The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”
Again, to quote Ezekiel 37:5&6, “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.”
In Exodus 21:22 it states that if a man causes a woman to have a miscarriage, he shall be fined; however, if the woman dies then he will be put to death. It should be apparent from this that the aborted fetus is not considered a living human being since the resulting punishment for the abortion is nothing more than a fine; it is not classified by the bible as a capital offense.”
@DailyFlash I believe that just is in the case of Adam. Since he was the first man. I believe when he breathed in Adams nostrils He also gave him a soul in that breath. Not 100% though.
@wildbill83 That’s because those animals are endangered, not out of some notion of the sanctity of unborn turtle or eagle life lol. There’s currently no danger of humans going extinct, in fact if anything we’re overpopulating.
I'm not anti-abortion, but there is a tendency to play ridiculous linguistic games around all of this.
There's no scientific reason for pro-abortion, atheist, secular, progressive, liberal people like myself to pretend that life doesn't begin at conception, regardless of whether that life is viable on its own outside of the womb yet.
Bacteria is a simple life form.
Let's just be real about all of this.
Now the question of whether all life, or life at various stages of development has [i]rights[/i], where those rights come from, and whether those rights can ever be interfered with (at [i]any[/i] age, in any demographic) is an entirely separate issue. Don't conflate that with biology and when life begins, that's a pointless, disingenuous diversion/distraction.
@SW-User Actually, a sperm without an egg or an egg without a sperm is “alive”, so life begins before conception. So any time a guy jacks off he’s committing a holocaust!
@Human1000 Sounds as if you don't (give a shit; what a strange expression). Neither do I because 'when life begins' is an abstract concept with no relevance to my existence.
@CopperCicada Life is generally defined as the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death [i](death, that time all those capacities stop to excist)[/i].
Maybe in your society, I know a lot of people that care about children abuse. The issues over here are largely financial, because punishing parents and taking the kids away have a financial impact on the state treasury. It's way more sad that the community chooses not to pay that, so I guess the majority doesn't care enough. But you are absolutely right that when you say it like I say, that this is an issue in a lot of societies, linked to the amount of means that a society has. Because most of our societies have laws that are supposed to take care of abuse. The execution, is largely lacking.
I consider life less important then conciousness. Any organism, living or inorganic that shows a form of concioucness should get a level of respect for as long as conciousness can resume. That means animal life as well as AI that reaches a conciouss level. I'm not like Jaap Kruithof [i](a dutch philosopher)[/i] that got angry every time he got flowers, because he argued that giving someone flowers is the same thing as a mass murder.
