The start of ‘life’ and the supposed ‘rights’ that go with it is a matter of great controversy, just as you state. The idea there is some ‘real’ line-in-the-sand when life begins strikes me as a philosophical nonsense.
I get your take on the progressive perspective, and I am not surprised to note your lack of…
John Hopkins

John, if we a endowed with inalienable rights by our creator, then is not conception a creation? This is the real fundamental question. This question cannot be when life begins as you would be correct about the philosophical quandary. So the real question, as stated above, is when is it created. Not begins. This distinction is critical and not a simple semantic ploy.

Before proceeding to attempt to answer further, imagine, for a moment, a hypothetical question. What if the Big Bang which spawned the first stars and grew outward at an incredible rate; a rate that is increasing, not at a linear but a parabolic rate is occurring within something vastly larger, like say, a womb. Now imagine this happening 6 or 8 or 12 times more simultaneously. As in sextuplets.

If the known universe contains all the building blocks needed for life and that quantum physics is correct that there may be several (multiple) dimensions or universes and each could be treated as an independent cell dividing being, then did it begin with the Big Bang or was it literally created then and with it all life?

You might suspect that this is merely philosophical rationale but if it is then isn’t all scientific theory also. There is no scientific method to test the origins of the universe but it’s a safe bet that for something to occur it must have an impetus. To begin is to start, to create is to produce. Both are actions but only the later is also a thing or if you’d like an object.

Life is both an action and a thing. As such it’s formation is as critical to its existence as is its start. If its form is taken to be from cell division then isn’t it clear that life begins at the first division not at say the 256th or 1024th.

So here Svetlana Voreskova and I disagree completely. I believe that it is absolutely scientifically provable when the exact moment life begins. At least that’s my uneducated opinion over many decades of introspection, non empirical deduction and a-priori reasoning.

What I do know is that this (being pregnant) is not a choice any more than contracting a virus, getting cancer, growing a tumor, or ingesting a parasite. The difference is that, unlike those things just mentioned, a fetus, even one stillborn, will be gestated out of the body. This is given to the fact that it’s not a part of the body but rather an independent growing organism. Those other things require a host and cannot survive outside of symbiosis or metastasis.

Meanwhile something I learned about fetuses is that they’re independent long before scientists readily acknowledge (probably due to political pressure). This can be corroborated by the fact, first presented to me by Sandra Lee Smith a retired nurse, that the fetus will often have a different blood type then the mother and can cause complications in pregnancy within the very first month. So I maintain, as many religious people also do, that life is endowed at the moment of conception. The scientific evidence also seems to support, or at the very least strongly suggests, that life is created at conception.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.