Slashdot Mirror
Start of Life Gene Discovered
gollum123 writes "The BBC reports that scientists from the UK and France have may found a gene responsible for controlling the fertilization of a new egg." From the article: "The HIRA gene is involved in the events necessary for the fertilisation that take place once a sperm enters an egg. Faults in this gene might explain why some couples struggle to get pregnant despite having healthy sperm ... Although their work in Nature is based on fruit flies, the same genetic processes are present in humans."
Does this mean that people are willing to acknowledge that fertilization is the start of life for individuals in a species that reproduces via sperm and egg?
This would require a change in germ cells in testicles -- a daunting prospect. And there are two lives you affect doing this.
1. The father has changes to testicles (cringes at thought of just HOW you get the new DNA in there).
2. Any changes you make to the sperm would be passed onto the fetus. Doesn't matter whether change is dominant or recessive, if it is in the sprem that fertilizes the egg, it's part of the fetus.
Ignorance is not a crime; neither should it be a way of life
Congress control $ = inmates run the asylum
This begs a small penis joke.
-pf
Who gives a fuck if it is a 'human life' under undefined terms, or under your defined terms, it is a living organism for crying out loud!
So, I should stop eating plants? They're living organisms! In fact, they're still alive when I eat them!*
* assuming they're fresh - fast food salads notwithstanding.
Don't trust any concentration of power.
While I tend to agree with you that any viable cell that may become a human being must be treated with the same respect a fully developed one demands, I would not force other people to live under my beliefs.
It is curious many people (don't know your position about this) who object to abortion never do so about death penalty.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
I am a strict materialist, as you seem to be. Therefore, I agree that organic life has no "animating spirit" that fundamentally distinguishes it from non-life. In that sense, you are correct that life is just "an elaborate pile of goo".
On the other hand, human life exhibits some characteristics that are currently beyond all scientific explanation. In particular, I am thinking of free will, conciousness, and self-awareness (which are all probably words for the same underlying phenomenon). No one has the slightest idea how these characteristics arise in a human (and, puzzlingly, don't seem to in any other form of life).
While this doesn't necessarily imply that humans have "souls", it does leave the question very much up in the air. Therefore, it is entirely possible that your personal pile of goo is home to some extremely unusual processes. Some have speculated, for example, that quantum mechanical uncertainity is at the heart of free will. In this sense, the difference between "human" and "a bunch of cells" is an immense one.
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
Wow, do you political moonbats EVER take a day off?
I'm not a Republican (or a Democrat) by the way... just sick of seeing politics dragged into EVERYTHING. The fact that this has been moderated "interesting" rather than "off-topic" (as it clearly is) shows the extent to which this crap has gotten out of hand.
Hint: there are lots of people who don't give a flying fuck about your big-end vs. little-end fetish.
Firstly, it may be a living organism. But at 2 weeks or 3 weeks, certainly not cognizant. Further more, it's not so much taking the life of a 'child' (I wouldn't call a bundle of goop after a couple weeks a child), but preserving the life style of the mother. For people who accidentally conceive, and have no wish to have a child, who are not ready to have a child- say a college student- a child would be catastrophic. Certainly the mother's livelihood takes precedence over a bundle of goop. I can't see how you would argue that an abortion is a worse outcome than a mother being forced to have a child she doesn't want and has no interest caring for.
Secondly- pull your head out of your ass and realize that people can accidentally conceive while using protection. It's not foolproof.
Thirdly- go back to school and learn you some gooder words:
"genocide- Noun. The deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation." Last time I checked, "babies" can't be classified as a nation or ethnic group.
Lastly- you can say "Abortion is legal ______ (I would say infanticide, but that definition doesn't really fit either)," but the fact is that it is legal. So, neener neener neener.
Please, come back when you have some sensical arguments and aren't typing while slobering over a Bible.
I have never met any American, left, center or right, who is at all pleased with the "mass slaughter of Iraqi and Afghani children".
Can you provide even one example?
Or are you just making "#$# up?
Under your logic, you would also permit murder of fully sentient adult humans! After all, you wouldn't want to force your belief that murder is wrong upon others?
It is perfectly logical and self-consistent to use force in order to prevent one person from harming another. I daresay you would hate living in a world that did not adopt this general standard.
He works in mysterious ways, so don't bother to wonder why He couldn't optimize the system in each species.
Maybe it's because it is so optimised is why it exists in different species.
Hmm...
An unborn child can hardly stand up for itself. Would you say we shouldn't try and stop parents killing their 10-year-olds?
It is curious many people (don't know your position about this) who object to abortion never do so about death penalty.
While I'm personally very anti-death-penalty, a child is almost the definition of innocence. You can't compare wanting to stop people killing their children - which is how most anti-abortion people I've spoken with see what they're doing, I'm not saying they're right or wrong - to wanting to stop criminals who have killed other people being killed.
I am trolling