I have provided a biological basis and if you look through the thread you'll see I've never argued from a religious stand point
your religious assertions are implicit.
i saw you talk a bit about zygotes, but you did not expound. i saw you talk a bit about 48 chromosome ape DNA, but not about any human DNA.
Yes, a simple clump of cells has no potential to become a human being, but an embryo does. That is the difference. It is certainly not self-sustaining as of yet, but neither are new born children, are they?
since you do not see the whole process as a computer executing it's code, then i ask, where do you draw the line? when does a clump of cells becomne an embryo? when it starts to morpologically look like a baby? is that all you go on? so what the difference between a clump of cells that looks a little like a baby, and a clump of cells that looks a little little like a baby? how do you know?
Human life begins at conception: when the cell takes upon the 48 chormosomes of human beings.
i know i know, we ARE apes. you're right. but we still only have 46, sorry. but i would like a source for your assertion that life starts at conception.
I'll say no, as the zygote had no choice in the matter.
and i'll say no too. the 46 chromosomes that you kill when you cut your hair, have no say in the matter either.
a zygote has no choice in the matter?? come on, really now.
Scientists tend to exaggerate their claims in order to get more funding, especially in medical research.
oh i see. science phobia. i would like to see a source for this assertion too, thanks.