CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
11
Yes. No.
Debate Score:22
Arguments:12
Total Votes:30
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes. (6)
 
 No. (6)

Debate Creator

NKJV(511) pic



Does life begin at conception?

Yes.

Side Score: 11
VS.

No.

Side Score: 11
5 points

Pro-lifers are often criticized for their position that a new, human life begins at conception. Many incorrectly think that this belief is based on some blind religious dogma, a scripture passage somewhere, or some stubborn need to tell women what to do with their bodies. All the while, this same opposition likes to pretend that they are the scientific, logical ones – obviously not blinded by religion or some judgmental God.

Of course, this is exactly backwards from reality. The entire basis for a new, human life beginning at conception stems from well documented, universally recognized scientific fact. The only ones who deny this are those blinded by their own religious dogma of so-called “choice” who have a stubborn need to deny scientific fact in order to stay faithful to their own ideology.

If science had proven that human life actually began at implantation or at nine weeks or whenever, then that’s precisely when we (Catholics and any other reasonable belief system) would believe that human life began. Simple. And, logically, it would be from that moment when this human being should be treated with the rights and dignities that come with being a human being.

But that’s not what science has told us. Science has quite clearly and decidedly proven that a new, human life begins at conception (i.e. fertilization. AKA the moment sperm and ovum meet and form an entirely new, self-directing living organism of the human species with its own individual DNA distinct from both mother and father.).

At this point in the debate, some try and introduce a separate distinction and question of “personhood.” Aside from this usually being a convoluted way to try and create classes of human beings and that it doesn’t hold up to any consistently logical scrutiny, it’s also not at all a scientific argument. It’s a philosophical one. So it is totally irrelevant to the scientific question of when human life begins.

Recently, Dr. Robert George wrote an article outlining this whole topic in more detail. And if you want to really learn your stuff, pick up his excellent book entitled Embryo (I’m in the middle of reading it right now). In his words:

“That is, in human reproduction, when sperm joins ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though in the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Readers need not take our word for this: They can consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, such as Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.” – Dr. Robert George

“Human embryos, whether they are formed by fertilization (natural or in vitro) or by successful somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT — i.e., cloning), do have the internal resources and active disposition to develop themselves to the mature stage of a human organism, requiring only a suitable environment and nutrition. In fact, scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior. Thus, human embryos are what the embryology textbooks say they are, namely, human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage.” – Dr. Robert George ........ http://dadmansabode.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=754#p754

Side: Yes.
2 points

Does life begin at conception?

Hello N:

Of course, it does.. The people who say it doesn't are just trying to assuage their own conscience when they decide to END that life.. It's EASIER to pretend that it's just some "mass" of cells..

Don't mistake me for a pro lifer, though. I simply admit that abortion is ending a LIFE..

excon

Side: Yes.
1 point

Yeah,

And ending a life has sign that can be found in abortion, Bloodshed (coming out from fetus linked example)

-So fetus is alive and

-abortion is a unconscious life taker.

-a non-living thing cannot have blood.

Side: Yes.
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
0 points

Do i have to show you as the Stupid Stupid Individual that you are ? So let's go there and expose the Dummy you are !!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2014/6/28/1310323/-Life-Does-Not-Begin-at-Conception-and-I-Can-Prove-It

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-pro-life-democrats-abortion-20170501- story.html

Your party claims a fetus is a mass of cells Dummy LMMFAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: No.

People keep missing the point of how ludicrous it would have been for a German to keep supporting the Nazi party while claiming to be Prolife for Jews.

So here is an analogy even a child might grasp. This analogy is for all the supposed Prolife Democrats voting for this extreme Pro abortion Democrat Party.

If you were driving down the road, and came upon two Foster homes. Each home was asking for your financial support so they could continue on with their policies towards their foster children. The policies of each Foster home was different and you had to choose which home to support.

One home believed in the right to life, that every innocent human life had worth and deserving of protection. They believed in safety nets for those who could not help themselves. However they did not believe in Big Government forcing tax payers to pay for free College, free abortons, free, free, etc. etc.

Now the other home believed in the right to choose which Foster children were allowed to live. They believed some Foster children might have a harder life, or were Special need's, or were simply burdens, or simpy more of an inconvienence, etc. etc.

So therefore they would decide which Foster kids lived, and which ones are killed.

Kind of like an animal shelter. Some get adopted into homes, some get killed.

Now this second Foster home was more politically correct and more Progressive thinking. They believed Foster kids were entitled to tax payer support from cradle to grave no matter if they were someday able bodied and capable of supporting themselves.

They believed that all high school graduates should be given free College, and many other free things, unless of course they had already been killed in the Foster home.

Lets say you were a proponent of free College, or other social issues supported by the second Foster home.

So tell me, which Foster home would you support? Whose policies best fit on your scale of humanity?

If you say you are truly Prolife, and believe these unborn babies are innocent human lives deserving of protection, how could you ever support the Foster home that supports the right to kill unwanted Foster kids? This would be no different then supporting your Democrat Party that supports No Restriction abortions of healthy viable late term babies.

This is not rocket science, and for any supposedly Prolife Democrat to vote for this extremist Pro abortion Democrat Party, is beyond credible. I call you a complete deceptive phoney when claiming to be personally prolife. You have no true caring for these unborn lives. Your vote says it all. It says you care more for their supposed quality of life ater they are born, then their right to life to begin with! Life to you is a grey area, whereby erring on the side of death is acceptable. Social programs, on the other hand, are absolutes when it comes to priorities for you!

Conservatives and Christians say we care for them BEFORE AND AFTER they are born. We will feed and protect innocent vulnerable lives no matter their age or location.

Side: Yes.
Dermot(5736) Banned
2 points

From the L A times .... Richard Paulson

The multicellular pre-implantation embryo cannot be equated with a human being. It is a collection of stem cells, each of which has the capacity to grow into any part of the placenta, as well as fetal tissues and organs, but it is not itself a new human life. It is also potentially more than one individual, since identical twins are the result of a single implantation.

From a scientific perspective, life doesn't begin at any one point, it is a continuum. For HHS to define it as beginning at conception is a transparent attempt to justify restrictions on certain contraceptives as well as abortion.

Even if it’s was accepted as fact that life began at conception so what ?

Side: No.
1 point

To me, "life" begins with the first "life giving breath". Before that it is an "existence", A "potential" life that deserves every protection we can give it until it endangers an existing life or creates an unacceptable hardship on other, already existing lives. The choice should be with the mother and/or father of this potential life. Bringing a life into a situation that is likely to cause, and be a part of suffering, is not being kind. Had I been aborted I wouldn't know if I had been. Many have been vrought into a life of poverty, sickness, suffering. Many, because of that have turned to crime and caused the suffering of others. A mother deserves to choose what happens to her children, either the existing ones or those that don't exist yet. If she makes the wrong decision isn't it up to "God" to judge whether she is right or wrong?? Certainly not up to you or I!

Side: No.
0 points

If we accept that life begins at conception as a fact, that would make you and your pro-choice buddies' jobs harder.

Side: Yes.
Dermot(5736) Disputed Banned
1 point

If we accept that life begins at conception as a fact,

So you and your anti choice buddies don’t .....interesting

that would make you and your pro-choice buddies' jobs harder.

How so ? I couldn’t give a fuck either way

Side: No.
NKJV(511) Disputed
0 points

When you are ready to leave my religion out of other discussions, you have mypermission to post on my debates. That was uncalled for.

Side: Yes.
1 point

Obviously not. The gametes are already alive, despite not having yet fertilized/been fertilized.

Dead sperm simply do not fertilize dead eggs.

"A zygote is a gamete's way of producing more gametes."

-Robert A. Heinlein

Side: No.

Life begins BEFORE conception. Sperms and eggs are living cells you bloody tosser.

Side: No.