When is an embryo defined as alive!?

by definition, all cells are alive.

Brandon, here is an explanation from the bio-medical researchers.
Each stage - from conception to birth, is specifically defined by name
until the baby (human being) arrives via birth.



http://www.bio-medicine.org/biology-definition/Human/

Yes that's right, littlek, but they're not considered human beings.

To quote Bill Hicks: You're not human until you're in my phonebook.

It's your conclusion based on your view of where the line should be. Not before or after conception, but at the actual moment that the sperm breaks through and fertilises the egg. Or is the point where the zygote successfully attaches to the womb, and a pregnancy results? Because we probably should be having an awful lot more funerals.

The point of my sarcasm is to demonstrate the arbitrary nature of line you have drawn at the point you have chosen, it's not a line that is as clear and obvious as you may think it is.

Life persists, when 2 human beings make a third, it's a continuity. There's no moment of magic deserving of any special magical protection. At 12 weeks, it's distinguishable as a human being. So? It still fits very few of the criteria of a complete human being.

We are WAR CRIMINALS! That morality ship has sailed a long time ago.

Just ask one of the 300,000 dead Iraq's who did nothing to us.

That's a crock. There are three main types of dead in Iraq:

(1) combatants killed by us
(2) non-combatants killed by us despite our best efforts to limit deaths to combatants
(3) people killed by someone other than us.

Of these, we're supposed to be killing group (1), group (2) is despite our best efforts as in every war, and group (3) isn't our fault.

I always considered war as a kind of post natal abortion. The societies involved do not consider another body worth maintaining,or educating, hence we must arrange for their deaths.

Whatever the state of development the result is similar.

Prevent conception,Abort fetuses, Starve children, Kill adults. All societies require at least one of these behavior patterns to survive. Whatever floats your boat.

Wrong about Sperm and Egg, they do not reproduce, do not maintain homeostasis, and do not have celular hierarchy, the fetus IS alive though.

You are conflating "alive" with "a living organism". Sperm and egg are indeed alive. Try creating an embryo with dead sperm and egg and you'll appreciate the difference soon enough.

"Life" is continuous in the human reproductive cycle.

an empryo sucks its thumb, cries when it bored or hungry, plays with its umbilical cord and often hug the placenta, respondes to touch will either try to touch back or get away . Only an idiot would claim an embryo is not alive

That's a very good example rockpie. We as a society don't force people to give blood transfusions or donate organs for another person to live. A mother in that situation would be within her rights to deny to give up her blood for another. Why is abortion any different? It's not.

The whole is "when is an embryo alive?" question is a big factor in the embryonic stem cell research controversy. I can not easily prove that the embryo IS alive without bringing in the Bible, which I don't know if you believe. Concerning the debate about whether stem cell research is ethical, I do tell you that each of us is special from the second we were conceived. We each had many things programmed into us for the future, such as the way we were going to talk, look, act, and what our talents were going to be. Even if you don't think that someone isn't alive until they leave the womb, we must consider the future for an unborn baby. Later, it will go on to have a life like ours. But what if it was used for stem cell research? Think about that. YOU could've been used for stem cell research. But you weren't, and that's why you are here today, reading this. An embryo used for SCR (stem cell research) is dead before it had a life. That is why embryonic SCR is so cruel. My point is that it doesn't even matter WHEN you believe the exact moment that someone becomes alive is, because an embryo is a human. Yes, a small human. Small indeed. But as Dr. Suess said, "A person's a person, no matter how small." Yes, yes, an embryo is a person. It just hasn't left the womb yet. And sacrificing this person for science, even if it is for the sake of another person, is wrong. Look back in history. Mayans and Aztecs sacrificed humans to please spirits, their gods, or the dead. (The following statement is said in all due respect:) you have to admit that this is crazy and obviously not right. Why kill an innocent person (the one sacrificed) for the life of another ( the people sacrificing)? This can be applied to stem cell research: why kill an innocent person (an embryo) for the life of another (the person with a disease)? And the funny thing is, umbilical cords and induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells can be used for the same purpose as embryos WITHOUT sacrificing an unborn child. Of course, you may argue that embryos are better and cannot be so easily replaced. But in fact, iPS cells are incredibly easy for scientists to make. The only problem is that they are still researching and experimenting with iPS's and so they aren't ready for use yet. But until then, umbilical cords can be put to use! It is fact that 4.3 births occur per second (371, 163 per day). Also, there is one umbilical cord per birth. Think about that. Umbilical cords are very common. Why shouldn't THEY be used in stem cell research?

I am NOT against stem cell research. I am against EMBRYONIC stem cell research. Embryonic SCR should not be allowed. It is destructive and completely not ethical. Embryos are also replaceable, and I am all in favor of the new phase in the stem cell field: iPS's.

Yes, and insofar as the embryo is composed of "live" cells it is alive from the point of conception, but it is not a "person" until it acquires that status by some kind of human society.

Yes, isn't it funny how when society labels someone a person, it comes with a bag full of "rights", versus to just if you're alive, for ex. a bacteria.

Yes, rights and obligations. But "personhood" is a vague notion: We treat some categories and groups of humans as sub-persons--we usually use the term subhumans--while we grant a kind of proto-personhood to our pets (I know I do to my feral cat and elephants and whales).

yes sure why not when there is noone else but u, what else is gonna stop u from usin words to assert anything about everything truth and rights

how an embryo is conceived a votre avis??? a votre avis is the answer to such silly idiotic question, as it clearly exhibit the reason of such claim being god that u want to scotch his chair above all at any prize or price

so if god decide what u r in ur mum belly for fake existence of humans conditions it becomes the reason of existence conceptions trutH????

con cept ion, is a trinity sirs as it is clearly shown con cept tion

u must conceive smthg before being conceived and realize its already objective existence

and to conceive is to b an objective perspective end in being free still sense as the result of conceiving objective superiority existence fact

how an embryo in an animal or mummy belly is an objective perspective reality end about everything

but to answer the topic, an embryo is alive only when it perceive objective existence, when objective is superior and an embryo is barely a nothing plus, then an embryo is alive when it recognize objective superiority existing, so like seein the mother which is the figure of superior symbolically since could been in peace inn
or when he recognize himself being like seein its own body movements constancy as a superior fact of objective existence

alive is the sense of being free in moving constantly so constant objective freedom ends and results

the only way for objective freedom to b is truth which result is the objective same for free else individuality, so the freedom would b absolute fact then real living

nature is life bc there is noone else free objective but her so she invent for all their free wills while they are killed and negatively being like animals possessed accordin to what she invent doing as living alone

that is why she is called being a liar absolutely

Human embryos, babies in utero do those things. They do respirate via the mother and excrete waste through the mother. They have senses, movement, and feed. They grow into humans that reproduce. Tadpoles are alive and will never be anything else but a frog. Human embryos are alive and will be never anything but human. Abortion is therefore the intentional killing of human life, there is no way around that.

A human embryo is a alive and human. It's a human embryo, not a chimpanzee embryo.