The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

Life begins when the baby has brainwaves.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 288 times Debate No: 107199
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




This is pure factual science. Brainwaves are how you tell if someone is alive, and a person. What a women or girl chooses to do with her prengancy is no one's business. It's not a murder, it's a choice. This is science and choice in action.


Life begins either at conception or implantation.
Why do I say this? Because at conception one becomes unique, with their own dna and their development planned out. At implantation, the child is developing already. It's course is already set.

For life, something is developing. For dealth nothing is. Before brainwaves, the child is developing.

And what of the implications of brain waves for brain development determining humanity? The brain doesn't stop developing well into the twenties. By that logic, is a seven year old less human than someone in their thirties?

Not to mention brain abnormalities like Holoprosencephaly, in which the brain hemispheres do not seprate or do not fully seperate? Or Anencephaly where some or a lot of the brain is missing? Are they any less human?

I think not.

Brain function doesn't mean life or humanity. Development does.
Debate Round No. 1


Thanks for taking my debate. I believe my view is more scientific because aa fetilized egg or implantanted embryo is not sentient. It does not have sensory perception or self awareness however limited until 20 weeks after implantation when the fetus has lmitited sentience, brainwaves, and the right to live. I suffered for years of suicidal depression due to fertilizationist propaganda because I prevented an egg from implanting. The fertilized egg or embryo is an organism, but not a sentient persion with the right to live. It's just not a complete package or persion. Let me know what evidence you need. I need you to prove a fetilized egg or embryo is a person with the right to live.


The ability to feel doesn't determine life. I will be addressing this as to the debate title before jumping into what you really want to discuss. This part is primarily important to potential voters.

Let me dissassemble your agument, "
The fertilized egg or embryo is an organism, but not a sentient persion with the right to live."

Using the term organism contradicts the title; Life begins when the baby has brain waves. The reason for this is because,

"In biology, an organism is any individual entity that exhibits the properties of life. It is a synonym for "life form"." -

"From a form of life considered as an entity; an animal, plant, fungus, protistan, or moneran." -

If the unborn human is an orgamism, it is life and alive. By definition.

Now onto what I think you really want to discuss.

If you are correct and a person isn't truly a person until the development of brain waves, then not much changes. If you are incorrect than it could be the death of millions of small children. That danger is huge.

By the time an embryo implants, the course is set for its entire development. It is preparing for much more than it's first brain waves.

It is hard to say for sure if an unborn embryo can think in some fashion (You cannot ask, and sinace doesn't know everything), but I am of the belief that it is a state like dreaming. You cannot kill someone in their sleep. I would still appreciate a response on the section of my last argument: And what of the implications of brain waves for brain development determining humanity?

If we chose to mesure the rights someone should have on stage of development at all, what stops us from becoming like countries that still throw away newborn girls and disabled children?

Allowing abortion at all makes way as always, for the selective killing of the unborn that are disabled and female.

Babies get adopted close to immediately in the united states, and baring abortion at all stages doesn't change that. Adoption brings happiness, regardless of whom is right between us. Abortion brings nothing.

I'm going to stop there, until I can see if this is the direction you meant to take this. If not I will switch strategy.
Debate Round No. 2


Brainwaves equal life for humans and animals. The fertilized eggis not a sentient person, nor is even the fetus. Your statements are not doing you any credit. Life begins when the baby has brainwaves about 20 weeks after implantation, give or take. Pregnancy also begins at implantation, so contraception does not cause abortion. Let science be the whole of the law on life and choice issues, not psuedo-religious fantasy.


Stating that, "Brainwaves equal life for humans and animals." Is not proof of that. The burden of proof falls on both of us in something like this, because being wrong has major consequences.

Even Pro-choicers agree that the embryo is alive. That is a biological fact.

Now please respond to my last arguments, including the moral implications of basing the rights and status of a human on any developmental event.

I at no p
oint said that contraception causes abortion, so please do not put words in my mouth.

I hope voters will consider Pro's previos remark when voting on this in the section of conduct, "pseudo-religious fantasy".

I didn't even mention religion.
Debate Round No. 3


The embryo is alive the way sperm and ova are alive, and true individual sentient life begins when the baby has brainwaves. You might say and embryo has its own genetic code, and I am telling you so does certain cancers as well as DNA or RNA viruses like HIV. That is the beginning of a potential person, not a person with sentient though. You might bring up God and the Bible. Who aborts more embryros than Yahweh God? Yeshua was always God incarnate, but His body was not complete until He had brain waves. Let's entertain the thought that I'm wrong for a bit. Only Yeshua God is always right, but this is not a religion debate, so save it. That alleged life I prevented from implanting has no rights or personhood. I was raped. What had more rights, me or the fertilized egg. We might even both be wrong, but life at brainwaves make an H of a lot more sense than fertilization or birth being the only options, and what about my anonymous friend who had that abortion when she was 15? Her body, her right to choose, and anyone with any belief or disbelief can adopt my view point, because religion never really says when life begins, so science should dictate the law. Let me be clear: Life at fertilization or implantation is almost as arbitrary as life at birth. The fertilization versus birth debate presents a false dichotomy, and I will redo this debate when I have more references. All Other theories fall apart under scrutiny. I have experimented with many views, and the only one that holds up is life at brainwaves.


I was trying to make the, it is definitely technically life regardless, argument for the sake of voters because it applies to the title of the debate. I do want to win and that was a hole in your argument.

God may do as he wishes, he knows when it is someone's time. But we, through our free will, can and do kill. We shouldn't as we shouldn't lie, cheat or steal. You are the one who brought him up, not I.

I have been leaning towards rights at implantation, but I'm still not convinced. If you did take a life through preventing impantation, if that is killing, you can still see the sin without guilt. Why? Because going back to God whom you brought up, he takes it up so we don't have to.

With the fifteen year old, I will admit it makes me angry. Why? Because I have desperately wished to raise a child from the age of thirteen, and I can't imagine someone being willing to throw such an amazing blessing as a child away. But I can forgive them, so even in murder they can forgive themselves.

Feelings don't change the status of a human, I'm quite sure a good portion of the reason it took so long to abolish slavery is because people didn't want to see the mistake in themselves.

Sadly you didn't address the ethics at play when we use any stage of development as an indicator for humanity and rights, so I cannot do much more with that.

Technically, before a baby can detect stimuli it isn't sentient. I think that was the wrong word to use in the first place. It only means, "
able to perceive or feel things." It has nothing to do with thoughts, or the idea of being individual, or human. Just feeling things.

And the individual that is produced by conception is individual at any stage. That set of DNA will never be repeated, and the map never again followed. Unique as the rest of us each one is. It knows how to make that brain, and it knows where it is going every step of the way.

Especially seeing as brain development is not done until early adulthood. Anyway, the brain starts it's most basic development at Week 6 with the closing of the neural tube. That is six weeks not twenty. One of the reasons seeing the unborn as people only after week twenty falls apart, by this point they are already capable of a lot and their brain exists in a rudimentary phase.

In both spina bifida and anencephaly, that stage of brain development doesn't go smoothly but both are still quite human, one of the reasons I think that even then it makes very little sense. With the most severe anencephaly the child may only have a brain stem.

From the beginning they are building up to the brain developing. It is easy to argue that it was in progress the entire time.

I belive that the fact of humanity and development are what determines rights. Not a stage of development.

Thank you for your time and I conclude.

Ps, I appoligize if I'm a bit everwhere, I have been sick for the last week.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by dsjpk5 5 months ago
We know human life begins before that because the zygote is growing and developing before the creation of a brain.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by DawnBringerRiven 5 months ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro claims that life beginning at brain waves is pure factual science, yet provides no sources to support this being the case. Con on the other hand provided sources supporting their points. Throughout the debate Pro simply reiterates that sentience and brainwaves determine life and does not directly respond to the majority of Con's refutations. Con asked twice for Pro to address their point that if brainwaves determine life, are younger individuals less human then those with more brainwaves? Pro never addressed this point among multiple others.