Introduction
For many people in America, the most important political issue at hand is abortion.
Depending on what you believe about when life begins, abortion could either be the murder of
countless infants or a simple modern medical practice. Additionally, human embryo research,
including cloning, stem cell research, and abortifacients are also of concern considering their use
of embryos. The value of life is at question here and there is no other concept more important or
defining.
Arguments for Life Beginning Later in Development
While there are many arguments for life beginning later in development, three will be
discussed in this section (Irving, 1999). The first is that if pro-lifers claim that the human embryo
or fetus is a human life, then the human sperms and ova are human life as well. This would mean
that pro-lifers need to agree that the destruction of human sperms and ova are no different from
the wrongfulness of the abortion of a human embryo or fetus. Another argument is that
fertilization does not create a human being. Instead, it creates a bunch of cells or, rather, a piece
of the mother’s tissues. Because of this abortion is not killing a human being, but simply
removing unwanted cells and tissues from a woman’s uterus. Similarly, cloning, stem cell
research, and abortifacients are not experimenting on or harming a human being. They are
utilizing unnecessary cells and tissues that have been donated or thrown away from women. The
third argument is that the immediate product of fertilization is not instantly a human being. It is
the potential or possibility of a human being.
Arguments for Life Beginning at Conception
As there are multiple arguments in favor of life beginning later in development, there are also
many arguments for life beginning at conception (Irving, 1999). In response to the first argument
in the above section, the article’s author points out there is a definitive scientific difference
between parts of a human being that possess human life and a human embryo or fetus that is a
human life. The author argues that destroying a human sperm or oocyte does not constitute an
abortion since neither are human beings. The problem at hand is not when does human life begin.
It is when does the life of every human being begin. A human’s organs, skin cells, sperm, or
oocytes all possess human life. However, they are parts of a human being, not the actual human
being. A single sperm or oocyte would not survive being implanted into a woman’s uterus.
Instead of growing they would just collapse. In response to the argument that the product of
fertilization is just a bunch of cells and tissues, the author notes that human embryonic organism
formed at fertilization is a mixture of both the mother’s and father’s chromosomes. Author
claims that this makes it more then just cells and tissues. Lastly, a third argument is that because
a human zygote is a human being, it is not just a potential or possible human being. It is a human
being with the potential to grow and develop.
Conclusion
The author states fairly early on in their article that the question of the beginning of human
life is not one that can be answered by any philosopher, bioethicist, theologian, politician,
obstetrician, or gynecologist (Irving, 1999). Only a scientist can answer this purely scientific
question. The author may be correct in regard to answering the very simple question of when
does a human life begin. However, this does nothing to answer the question of whether human
life is worth being valued. The author seems to think that just because she can perhaps prove that
human life begins at conception that it means that human life is worth keeping. This is where
philosophers and theologians become necessary to the conversation. If human life is just another
organism on a godless planet, then the author’s argument that human embryos are more then just
a clump of cells and tissues is worthless because that is all anything in this world is without a
spiritual aspect. Everything in a godless world is just tissues, cell, matter, etc. It does not matter
what happens to any human life at whatever stage if there is no worth attached to that human life
from a superior, authoritative force. Essentially, human life is only worth not aborting if that
human life has a soul attached to it that extends it beyond a fleeting physical existence.
