CreateDebate


Debate Info

329
221
Yes No
Debate Score:550
Arguments:483
Total Votes:619
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (232)
 
 No (197)

Debate Creator

LizziexLaura(4277) pic



Do you believe the embryo/fetus is a human being?

I am wondering what some of you think. Do you think it is a human?

Yes

Side Score: 329
VS.

No

Side Score: 221
7 points

I don't see what else the fetus will inevitably grow up to be. I've yet to hear of a human mother birthing, say, a litter of kittens.

Side: Yes

It is an human organism with human dna made by two humans. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that qualifies as human.

Side: Yes
Sitara(11088) Clarified
2 points

Upvote for logic. .

Side: Yes
4 points

Considering that it was made by a human being, then the answer is obvious

Side: Yes
Akulakhan(2973) Disputed
1 point

So, cars are human?

Side: No
Centifolia(1318) Clarified
4 points

sigh

Allow me to rephrase that to "Human DNA". Happy now?

Side: Yes
4 points

Yes. There is no proof that the fetus inside of the woman is any other species.

Side: Yes
2 points

It has the genetic code of a human. I don't know people can deny this. The only things I can think of are extreme ignorance and extreme self-centeredness, which has psychologically blocked one from accepting that abortions kill innocent humans. What else is it, if not a human? Is it a giraffe? Is it a penguin? Is it ant? Is it ocelot? Is it a hippopotamus? Is it a rhino?

Side: Yes
Entatri(6) Disputed
1 point

I don't believe people are on the no side because of those two options given. A human is defined as "1. A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens. 2. A person 3. Of, relating to, or characteristic of humans 2. Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals 3. Subject to or indicative of the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with humans 4. Having the form of a human. 5. Made up of humans." In the early embryonic stages, many animals look the same. A human embryo looks like a chicken embryo that looks like a whale embryo. So you can't really distinguish it from another animal. And as for the "subject to the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with humans," and "Having the form of a human," it can't have the weakness, imperfections, nor fragility of a human because it technically can't. It also doesn't have the form of a human. Where are the arms? The legs? The face? It doesn't look, act, or have the same flaws like us. Our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, has a 96% DNA match with us. Even humans have a DNA difference. We have a 99.9% DNA match with eachother. So whos genetic code does that embryo have? Mine? Yours?

Side: No
OddHannah(313) Disputed
3 points

In the early embryonic stages, many animals look the same. A human embryo looks like a chicken embryo that looks like a whale embryo. So you can't really distinguish it from another animal.

So becaues a fetus doesnt look like a human it cannot be human? Even though it comes from a human?

It doesn't look, act, or have the same flaws like us.

Again. Looks determine what can be human? Is that moral?

Even humans have a DNA difference. We have a 99.9% DNA match with eachother. So whos genetic code does that embryo have? Mine? Yours?

I do not see why you would ask such a question. The fetus shares DNA with the parents. The fetus is born as a combination of the mother and father's DNA.

Side: Yes
3 points

"In the early embryonic stages, many animals look the same. A human embryo looks like a chicken embryo that looks like a whale embryo."

Wow, you still believe that lie spewed out by Ernst Haeckel which was disproven 100 years ago? Click the attached link and scroll down and you'll see pictures of a human and a chicken embryos.

Supporting Evidence: Embryo Fraud (creation.com)
Side: Yes
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
1 point

The Law of Biogenesis: that which "is" is from that which is the same. Therefore, if the parents are human, then the child too will be human. It doesn't matter what it looks like or acts like, otherwise you could do the same for deformed already born humans. Under your own logic, then army veterans who have been deformed from bombs and do not function properly are, therefore, no longer humans.

Side: Yes
Quocalimar(6470) Disputed
1 point

See their they go again using this kill word. For something to be killed it has to be alive. A fetus, is by no medical definition alive.

What do you call alive, maybe we can match these terms up?

Side: No
3 points

A fetus, is by no medical definition alive.

Last time I check there was no official statement as to whether the fetus is alive or not. It would logically seem as it does.

Side: Yes
lolzors93(3225) Disputed
2 points

Are plants alive? Living simply means that it can take in from its environment and grow and sustain itself, in a sense. What does this sense mean? It means that it can take nutrients from its surroundings and keep itself functioning. A fetus and embryo are both taking in, though it be from the mother, and grow and sustain themselves. Therefore, they are alive.

Side: Yes
1 point

Saliva also has human genetic code .

Side: No
jimslim2020(34) Disputed
0 points

It has the genetic code of a human. I don't know people can deny this.

Does this imply that all human genetic codes are the same?

What else is it, if not a human? Is it a giraffe? Is it a penguin? Is it ant? Is it ocelot? Is it a hippopotamus? Is it a rhino?

If not a human? It could logically be everything there; few and far in between. Technically.

No, not all at once.

Side: No

This is a rediculous question from the standpoint of science. It is simple, the sperm has half a chromosome, the egg has the other half, when they meet they form a complete human chromosome. A new DNA structure is made that is unique and this makes the fetus an individual being. Sure it isn't fully developed yet, but neither is a 5 year old.

Side: Yes
Nebeling(1118) Disputed
1 point

So because it contains human DNA that makes it human?

Only 10% of the human body is actually human cells. The remaining 90% of cells are foreign bacteria, some of which are necessary for the health of our body. So basically, if it's only a human because it has human DNA wouldn't it be true that only 10% of the human body has natural rights? Wouldn't it then per se be alright to kill those 90%?

I don't really think all this gobbledygook about the human genome and human DNA really does much to explain why the fetus is a human being.

Side: No
1 point

The point isnt that it has a DNA code in it, the point is its a new DNA code different from the mothers and is multiplying which means two things: since it has all the information to make a fully functional human beings (something a blood cell or skin cell doesnt have) and since it is growing that means it is alive and human.

Second, since its DNA is different from the mothers it is not part of the mother therefore she has no right to kill it.

Side: Yes
2 points

You should edit your debate, Lizzie. I think you intended to ask "Do you believe a human embryo/fetus is a human being."

It was clear (to me) what you were asking, but you can see how the trolls jumped at the chance to create some diversions with it too.

I more than believe a human being in the embryonic and or fetal stage of their life is a human being. They are human organisms just as we all are and just as we all were when we too were in that stage of our own developments. Just as an amoeba is a living creature and a living being (even though they are only one cell in size). So, too is a human being when we are about that size.

Finally, the clincher (in my view) is the fact that a human being in the first days of their life, growth, development, etc. is the young of the parents who created them. A biological father becomes a biological father at conception.

Side: Yes
0 points

but you can see how the trolls jumped at the chance to create some diversions with it too.

Yeah you sure did jump on the chance to create some diversions.

Side: Yes
2 points

What has the potential to be therefore is.

You are stunting out a life, possibilities, simply because you can't handle the idea of being responsible. If you want your body - we have C Sections and the ability to prevent scars. If you don't want your child, even if the product of some horrible act that is certainly not that child's fault, you can adopt.

Side: Yes

An embryo/fetus is certainly human, and given they are not a portion of a whole, but rather their own whole (as opposed to, say, fingernails or dead skin), they would be a human being as well.

The better question would be, do you believe the embryo/fetus is a person? I do not, based on a number of factors. A fetus is human, and a human being, but personhood is something more nebulous that requires significantly more development to arise. Even an infant is not yet a person, strictly speaking. Personhood entails individuality and consciousness, which aren't yet present even at birth.

Side: Yes
1 point

Yes

I've never accepted the argument that it isn't life, or that it isn't human life, and I've said that multiple times on this site already.

But I've also never accepted that aborting it is murder. Killing, yes indeed. It is killing. But to be murder then by definition the society has to declared it an illegal form of killing. The fact that it isn't illegal means it isn't murder.

The pro lifers then will trumpet how horrible that supposedly is, but they're wrong again. Human society has many examples where killing is allowed or considered justifiable. You can't be absolute about the life of a fetus but then not give a damn about police or soldiers killing, or excessive force home defense, or high risk surgeries resulting in death, etc.

Side: Yes

What is a human being? Let's start there. A human being is a man, woman, or child of the species Homo sapiens, distinguished from other animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance. They are alive. Understand? Okay.

To be alive means your heart must be beating. Is your heart beating? Yes? Therefore, you are alive. You are a human being.

This debate is about whether or not we should classify a fetus as a human being.

Fetus:an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.

That is the definition of a fetus. A human baby. A fetus' heart start's to beat 3 weeks after it is conceived, and it is classified as an actual human baby 8 weeks after conception.

So, to answer your question: Yes, a fetus is a human being.

Side: Yes
1 point

It is a human - it just isn't developed as much as babies/adults. The only difference between a baby and a fetus is that the fetus is in earlier stages of development.

Side: Yes

No, it is a human fetus.

I've said this before, but if you keep making debates about this, I'm gonna keep saying it.

Human nails, human blood, human hair, human teeth, human saliva, human skin, human semen or human fetuses are all human, but that doesn't make them a human being.

Side: No
OddHannah(313) Disputed
3 points

Why is the fetus not a human?

Side: Yes
2 points

It is human, it's just not a human being. See the difference ?

Just like a human nail is human, but not a human being.

Side: No
2 points

I read all of that stuff with you and Hannah and that was the longest thing I have ever read.

Side: No

Haha, well I hope you had fun :)

Was it that interesting? :o)

Side: No
Troy8(2431) Disputed
2 points

It's not the same as a body part.

Human nails, human blood, human hair, human teeth, human saliva, human skin, human semen or human fetuses are all human, but that doesn't make them a human being.

Do all of these body parts you've listed develop into an adult human?

Side: Yes
jasminevines(50) Disputed
1 point

How does them having everything to make them human- a heart, a brain- not make them human? Is it just because they haven't been exposed to the outside world? Does that not make them a human being? They are inside of the womb, growing every single day, gaining something new every week, whether it be fingernails, or knuckles, or even a small mole on the side of their leg. They are growing, human beings. Their hearts are beating, they are alive. If that isn't human enough then I don't know what is.

Side: Yes
1 point

If a fetus can be of any mammalian species then the fetus is not strictly a human being.

If embryo can be that of any mammalian species then embryo is not strictly a human being.

The question makes the objective statement that the embryo/fetus is a human being.

This is not true because a fetus can be that of any mammalian species and so can an embryo. The words embryo and fetus are subjective words used to describe the stage of development for the young of the subject.

So no, I do not believe the embryo/fetus is a human being.I believe a fetus is a fetus and an embryo is an embryo.

Side: No
OddHannah(313) Disputed
4 points

This is not true because a fetus can be that of any mammalian species and so can an embryo. The words embryo and fetus are subjective words used to describe the stage of development for the young of the subject.

This debate is for a human fetus. It is quite obvious if you read the other arguments. Regardless of label we are arguing if we should acknowledge it as a human being of equivalent value to other human beings.

Side: Yes
link6065(741) Disputed
1 point

This debate is for a human fetus

Actually this debate is if i believe its a human being

Do you believe the embryo/fetus is a human being?

It is quite obvious if you read the other arguments.

If the debate is asking me a personal question expect personal answers.

Regardless of label we are arguing if we should acknowledge it as a human being of equivalent value to other human beings.

Does a deer fetus deserve to be acknowledged as a deer?

Side: No
link6065(741) Disputed
1 point

Also, in another debate I apparently lost to the argument that rights do not exist. So regardless if it's value is the same it has no Rights (entitlements) and either do you.

Side: No

I mean it might be.

Oh wait you mean if the gamete cells are both human that the fetus is? The of course. It's a human fetus, but it's bot a human being if that's what you asking.

My hair, is human hair.

My nails, are human nails.

That fetus, is a human fetus.

Side: No

What is the difference between a human and a human being?

Side: Yes

In the case it was being used, a human being is a noun, a thing. Human is at that time being used as an adjective. The fetus is definitely human, but only by adjective it is in no way a human being yet.

Side: Yes
1 point

One is the human body and the other is referring to the human existence.

Side: Yes
pioteki(1) Disputed
1 point

the simplicity of this is that the fetus is a human specimen with human dna

.

Side: No
1 point

I am not sure if I want to classify it as a being yet. I believe it is human. But I like to think it is a being after it has been born.

Side: No
2 points

Why do you not think it is a human? Or better yet a being?

Being: something conceivable as existing

A fetus is obviously in existence.

But I like to think it is a being after it has been born.

That does make any logical sense. If being simply means something in existence and the fetus exists then why say it isn't a being?

Side: Yes
Cartman(18192) Clarified
1 point

We are talking about a human fetus, I still think it is human.

Being: something conceivable as existing

I wasn't using this definition. I don't consider something that hasn't been born yet higher than it should be.

Side: Yes