Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!pmd From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Re: If life begins at conception, th Message-ID: <4240@cbscc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 3-Dec-84 14:44:57 EST Article-I.D.: cbscc.4240 Posted: Mon Dec 3 14:44:57 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 19:32:44 EST References: <2152@stolaf.UUCP> <71400002@trsvax.UUCP> <4182@cbscc.UUCP>, <162@psivax.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus Lines: 61 } }In article <4182@cbscc.UUCP> pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) writes: }>From a biological standpoint, it seems to me that sex cells only become }>an individual, a human being, when a certain specific event takes place: }>conception. After that it grows on its own. If a human life begins at }>conception it is not because of its potential to be human life, that potential }>has been fulfilled. }> } }[Stanley Friesen:] } This is incorrect, from a biological standpoint the moment of }fertilization(conception) is not particularly special. }To summarize: } 1) The ovum is freed from the mother when it is ejected } from the ovary, in a sudden manner. } } 2) The only *immediate* effect of fertilization is to stimulate } undifferentiated cell division. } } 3) The genetic impact of fertilization is delayed until } cell differentiation begins, some time later. } }Therefor -- Biologically there are *no* clear, sharp dividing lines, } and *any* demarcation point is of necessity arbitrary. } The issue must therefore be decided on different grounds. I think no. 2 above is unnecessary reductionism. It isn't *just* undifferentiated cell division. It is also the begining of the natural development of a human individual which never happens apart from the event of fertilization (of some kind). The differentiation of cells ocurrs not as the result of an external event (which fertilization can be viewed as from the standpoint of the ovum) but seems to happen as a matter of course; the mechanism for it still being pretty much a mystery to biologists. On these grounds no. 2 is just as much a genetic impact as no 3. After, all even the undifferentiated cells contain the genetic code of a unique human individual. It seems like, in order for us to consider conception a sharp dividing line, you would have it produce a fully developed infant as its "immediate" result (or maybe immediate cell differentiation?). This seems to me to be placing impossible (or arbitrary) requirements on a biological event in order to support a preconcieved conclusion. (i.e. that there is no conclusion.) Anyway, the whole reason for my response was just to show that Monty Python's (from whom some people seem to be getting their ideas) reasoning that "ever sperm is sacred..." if human life begins at conception is faulty. I'm not claiming that this point is our whole basis for argument, just that it isn't irrelevant. The more immediate question is what are we killing in an elective abortion. Not ova or zygotes; which are the stages of human development being discussed here. -- The "resurrected", Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd -- The "resurrected", Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd