psuvm%cjc@psuvax.UUCP (03/16/84)
....................................
Several people have stated that the fertilized egg is a human being,
and have asked those who disagree to give reasons. I would like to offer
some of mine:
First, biological: If instead of growing in the usual fashion, a child
developed into TWO children, it would be to say the least a very unusual
occurrence. And if it changed from being a child into being an undifferentiated
mass of cells - not a child with a tumor but just a large tumor - it would
be an event unheard of outside of horror movies. But it is quite usual for
a fertilized egg cell to develop into twins or more, and it does occasionally
develop into one of several types of tumor. If we accept the idea that a
human being cannot become a 'not-human' short of dying, then if the zygote
is a human being what is the tumor? and how many human beings are twins?
(There are cultures where all twins are killed at birth because one soul
split between two bodies is an intolerable deformity) I would at least wait
until the organism has developed far enough to determine that it will not
grow into something other than A Human Being.
Second - cold linguistics: I have never heard anyone in any context refer
to an egg as a chicken, or to an acorn as an oak tree. Even though we can
through slow-motion photography literally watch a frog egg develop into a
tadpole, then a frog, we still speak of an egg, a tadpole, and a frog. The
pattern in English holds for all life forms that I have ever heard of,
and I suspect it holds for other languages too. If you want to make an
exception for homo sapiens, I think you should offer a better reason than
just a dogmatic statement.
Third - personal experience: Some years ago I had a miscarriage at about
6 weeks; I perceived it as much like an extraordinally heavy monthly period,
and was disgusted and irritated by the discomfort and the mess. But by
your definition, I should have mourned for a death of a member of my family!
I consider the idea of mourning for a mess of blood and unidentifiable bits
of tissue to be ridiculous, revolting, and generally grotesque! If it has
no Human characteristics whatsoever then it is not "a human being".
I do not expect to change anyone's mind. But I do hope to convince
you that you will need more than religious or mystic dogma to change mine.
C. Clark
CJC@PSUVMA (BITNET)