The Instigator
SitaraMusica
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Hawkeye117
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Human life begins at implantation.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
SitaraMusica
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/17/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 743 times Debate No: 65357
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

SitaraMusica

Pro

The first round is for acceptance.
Hawkeye117

Con

I accept this debate and look forward to an enjoyable and highly debated topic so good luck and let's have fun with this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
SitaraMusica

Pro

Thank you to my wonderful opponant. Let us begin. To be an indvidual life form, one must be a genetically distinct organism and have a source of oxygen. Cells die without oxygen. The egg first receives oxygen when it implants. Oxygen is a major building block of life.
Hawkeye117

Con

"To be an individual life form, one must be a genetically distinct organism and have a source of oxygen."
Ok let"s start what"s wrong with this with this sentence technically your statement of saying to be an organism you have to be genetically distinct well that is not true as we can look at bacteria and many other single celled organisms that just do asexual reproduction and thus are not genetically different and are exactly the same; and saying they have to have a source of oxygen is not true as there are organisms that do not use oxygen to live and well even die if exposed to oxygen this includes single celled organisms and even some multicellular. With that out of the way you also say that oxygen is the building blocks of life like I stated before that is not true in all cases and to be specific life on earth is carbon based and the building blocks of life are amino acids. Now let"s start the actual debate you state that human life starts at conception that is not true when the sperm fuses with the egg anything at that point can happen the intended goal is making a human but anything can truly happen. Now this next part read the whole thing and do not take too literally but try to understand my point. Humans and bananas share 50% of the same genetic makeup so technically it is possible if say the DNA were corrupted and only the genetic makeup left is the same that makes up the banana survives and is built its not necessarily true that a banana would be formed as we know it but a human would also not be formed while this scenario is highly unlikely by the odds of probability it is possibly but would probably never happen but is possible. The point of this weird point I bring up is that even after conception it doesn"t mean a human well be made anything could happen to the DNA or the building process of the cells that would prevent a human from being formed the only way a human can be distinguished is then complex processes like a conciseness, brain function, organs being formed, and the shape of the body being formed.
http://genecuisine.blogspot.com...
http://biology.about.com...
http://www.scientificamerican.com...
http://www.astrobio.net...
Debate Round No. 2
SitaraMusica

Pro

I agree that the egg is genetically different at fertilization but it is not a person until it receives oxygen and that happens at implantation.
Hawkeye117

Con

I have clearly given my side of the debate and pro has refused to even give a rebuttal so I well wait for next round for pro to give me something worth debating and not being rhetorical as I already proved my point but con is still trying to make his point I disproved just with different wording so far I am disappointed with pros argument nothing but a few sentences and not even logical or even debatable just plain wrong, so please pro give me a point worth debating.
Debate Round No. 3
SitaraMusica

Pro

Disagreement is not a fallacy. The fictional idea of life at fertilization makes no sense. The egg does not receive oxygen until it implants, attaching its self to the mother. The pregnancy hormone is not produced until implantation, which happens 7 days after ovulation.
Hawkeye117

Con

Hawkeye117 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
SitaraMusica

Pro

SitaraMusica forfeited this round.
Hawkeye117

Con

Well sorry about the forfit had some stuff in life to take care of but con basicly shoots himself in the foot with his last round with saying life doesn't start at implantation when you are one trying to prove that human life starts at implantation and it is a fact life begins at implantation as both the sperm and egg are cells and cells are the most basic form of life ante are living organisms. But with that still pro has not given me any reason to debate his topic and has not given me a reasonal rebuttal worth of a debate. And as such pro has never cited his sources or tryed to back up his clames with facts and thus I end the debate and leave it to the voters.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Vajrasattva-LeRoy 2 years ago
Vajrasattva-LeRoy
(What in the world does rape have to do with the beginning of human life? )

The answer, of course, is NO.
Obviously, life & life forms are 2 different things.
The idea that an unfertilized human egg isn't alive doesn't make sense.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
cheyenne
It cannot really be anything but the woman's decision. It is her own body. She cannot be forced to provide babies to society against her will. To suggest that if they choose to terminate the pregnancy implies they lack maturity and/or integrity is incredibly shallow, naive, and insensitive, in my opinion.

There is also more than rape that is the issue. There could be severe problems with the fetus and severe health risks, including death, to the mother. In the rare case that the child would survive but the mother would die (my understanding is that usually they would both die), I don't see the justification in suggesting that the child's life should always be considered more important.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Undeniable......There is only one way for a woman to get pregnant, for one. Now there is only one non-consential way, and that is rape.

Even rape would not make a mature woman with integrity take the babies life.My daughter said if she had ever been raped, she would not kill the baby, but kill the rapist.In our upside down liberal world she would be encouraged to kill the baby but discouraged to kill the rapist.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
chewster...... There are no unwanted babies. Just some mothers who do not want their own baby. And all of us grew up in some kind of uncomfortable situations.I have never met any utopian households. That is no reason to kill a baby,is it?We have raised a generation of petty , irresponsible people.And 60,000,000 babies have been sacrificed on the unholy altar of liberalism.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
Life is not always preferable to death. Besides, there is a clear ethical issue with taking away bodily autonomy from pregnant women, especially considering all of the undesirable ways for a woman to become pregnant.

That being said, this is more of a semantic debate than anything. An individual human cell is human life. But an individual human cell is not conscious life.
Posted by chewster911 2 years ago
chewster911
cheyenne - If a mother aborts her child,then it means that she doesn't want it. And that means that if the child was allowed to develop and be born,it's life would probably not be joyful.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
That is a fact. That being is like none other. As unique as each of us. He/she has all the DNA it will ever have. At the moment of conception a new creation is there. It is sad that liberals have turned such a future joy into a curse.The mother that chooses to kill her baby is robbing that baby of life and any future joy she would have.

Of course there would be a change when the baby is born. It should be. That is when a mother becomes a parent. And the fullness of responsibility comes into play.

Instead 60,000,000 dead babies later, that joy was just sucked right out of peoples lives by evil liberalism.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
SitaraMusicaHawkeye117Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Only Con had sources.
Vote Placed by o0jeannie0o 2 years ago
o0jeannie0o
SitaraMusicaHawkeye117Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Although i dont agree i will give this to pro as con does not understand the stages of conception. Fertilization is not implantation and pro in no way shot himself in the foot. If life began at fertilization then 70% of all "life" would be "miscarried" as a chemical pregnancy. No one believes this and if they do... they must live very sad lives with all that death around. Curious pro, why would you say implantation is equal to something as complex as human life, as it is a mere speck that could be wiped away with your thumb? I equate this similar to the life of egg with a red spot that gets tossed in the trash. a "could have been" or a "might be". I must believe that if its too early to tell your pregnant then its too early to believe this is your child.