Does the scientific community agree that life begins at conception?
“When does life begin” is an important question as we explore the question whether a fetus is a human–and even more when we see how unborn babies are alive, and distinct human beings that need protection. In this video, Megan Almon discusses how the scientific community agrees that human life begins at conception, even if pro-choice advocates argue on philosophical grounds that human life in that stage is not yet a person.
Learn more about the scientific facts of the pro-life and abortion argument: https://www.summit.org/resources/articles/why-roe-is-against-reason/
Want to go even DEEPER into these topics? Check out our FREE Basecamp, “If Roe Goes” to see how we as Christians should respond if Roe vs. Wade is overturned
Want to equip your students to discuss these issues with truth and grace? Sign up for Summit Summer Student Conferences!
it's doesn't get a unique DNA until 2 days.
don't kid me pls.
Dr. Phil needs to hear this.
You don't need someone to explain life to you why abortion is wrong guys. Life is beautiful. There's very few strong, good reasons to want to support abortion.
Science certainly does not prove that life begins at conception. No matter what textbook or biologist you cite that says this, they will be employing some kind of philosophical justification for why conception should be the beginning. This includes: genetic uniqueness, fusion of two genomes, formation of a continuous boundary from two cells to a single one etc. I responded to all of these claims in this video: https://youtu.be/W7a5XR9nwAM
Regardless, since the “life begins at conception” claim relies upon arguments (not experimental evidence/data), it cannot be in the domain of empirical science. That is, science physically cannot prove when life begins. You need philosophy to back up arguments.
Hi, I'm wondering if we could use this clip in a podcast, this is so well said!
Abortion is murder. The end
I’m sorry but you are incorrect: embryologists, biologists, and the scientific community in general does NOT have a consensus of when life begins.
Keep in mind that a fetus that ceases development in the womb still has its own DNA yet is dead. A zygote having its own DNA does not establish LIFE. It establishes DNA.
Thank you for your excellent teaching
Life begins at conception but the soul enters at 12 weeks when the brain waves suddenly start
If at conception, as you say, there is a whole living human being then it should be able to survive outside of the womb. You are either a very ignorant or troubled and dishonest human being.
If life begins at conception, why aren't we 9 months old at birth?
A person is pronounced dead when they are brain dead. You can still have heart, be strapped to machines that help you breathe and still be dead.
She is completely wrong. Twins don't start from conception. They begin when the first cell , zygote, which was fertilized splits in two. The two separate cells were not the result of conception but came from the zygote which was. So we have a perfect example of people who started from single cells which were not conceived. The same thing happens with cloning. They take a cell from your body and create a twin from you. This twin was not conceived or fertilized. So life does not start at conception Life is the potential for a human to be created. So in reality every women should have as many babies as possible in their lives or they are preventing potential people from coming into the world. This is no different than abortion.
Conjoined twins came from a single zygote. Surely Siamese twins are not A " distinct whole human being"? There is no inherent individuality with the early embryo since normal early embryos have inherent ability to twin.
Parasitic life forms exist too though right? They can't survive without the host.. remember? 🤷
If you believe in religion, all life began with the universe.
If you want to talk sanely, I first want to determine when life ends.
Reveals how stupid or misleading prolifers are.
False information! The early embryo is not a whole indivisible organism since the embryo can split into 2 or more embryos evidenced by sets of identical multiples like identical twins, triplets, quadruplets even quintuplets. If the early embryo is already a person then identical twins are each half a person since both twins originally came from same embryo? Identical triplets are each 1/3 person since all 3 came originally from same embryo?
I’m an atheist. I’m pro-life. I believe that the unique genetic potential of a person has rights. That’s where my children came from, and me, and you. I’m glad all of our potential for existence was protected by someone at that time.
I know of a person whose grandmother was raped and still chose to have their child. This grandchild, as a result of that trauma, is one of the most influential and positive people in their sphere. It really made me think, considering millions are positively affected by this person.
Another was a lady whose mother was raped and she said how much she cherishes her life. She said if I was standing in the grocery store line, and someone next to me instantly and retroactively got their wish, I’d disappear. Perhaps they’d consider more deeply what their choice means if I did.
I’m not downplaying the victims of rape, but I am offering a nugget of value against abortion.
I had a child during a successful college period and chose to drop out and start a career in construction. A professor I respected suggested I/we should abort the child to stay in school. We didn’t, and still succeeded in career and family and wouldn’t change a thing. I just reoriented my priorities and goals. It was hard, but I did it and it has gone well.
Question: Who is created human?
Answer: Human
Prolifers are totally ignorant of cell biology pertaining to human embryology!
Cells from the early embryo are called blastomeres where one cell or a group of those cells have the potential to become embryos too.
With identical twins the embryo splits in half with quads the twin embryos both split to make four. We don't know why it doesn't happen more often in nature but in the lab it can be replicated where we create more embryos from original embryo because of the cells being totipotent In Petri dish we have in culture thousands even millions of blastomeres from one embryo where one cell or a group of cells have the potential to become embryos too with potential of being born. So how many people are in that dish?
Not only biology but theology, sound theology destroys the mantra "Personhood at conception". We know from testing that way over half of conceptions in females will be lost by spontaneous abortion and miscarriage even without the would be mother being aware when flushed out during menstruation. You would have to believe that most people will be killed before being born making God Supreme Abortionist.
Hermaphrodites are people with reproductive organs of both genders and came about by the merging of female embryo and male embryo. Are hermaphrodites two people?
Science destroys the mantra "Personhood at conception" since there is no inherent indivisibility nor individuality with the early embryo evidenced by identical twins, triplets, quads even quints where each set of multiples came from the same respective embryo and have same respective DNA. Surely identical twins are not each half a person.
Consciousness starts at the development of the frontal cortex, not at conception.
In biblical times, and even according to modern law, killing a pregnant woman is considered a double homicide. Life cannot be redefined by scientific consensus.
How come foetuses are same as born babies!? Babies will be drown if they are completely under water/amniotic fluid but foetuses survive even though they are completely covered with amniotic fluid!!
No life does not begin at conception, the egg is alive as are the little guys trying to reach her. Life continues it never begins. I am against abortion but if it must be done I would prefer a day after type pill because half of all fertilized eggs don't make it and are washed away.
How about we stop multiplying like parasite if we want future generations to have enough food and water left for the billions of babies we are having for no reason.
A ZYGOTE (THE RESULTING CELL FROM A SPERM AND EGG FUSING) IS NOT A HUMAN BEING. SCIENCE DOES NOT SAY IT IS A HUMAN BEING, IT'S WHAT BECOMES A HUMAN BEING. TALK FOR YOURSELF AND STOP LYING.
My problem is the Christian god commands abortion and has personally tipped infants to pieces him self. Chridtians have no right to push there morals on the matter.
Biologic definition of life: a living organism is cellular, can store and transmit information, reproduce itself, and is the product of an evolutionary process. For the whole to function as one organism, there needs to be sufficient brain activity to regulate and coordinate the workings of the various body organs and systems. The nature of the fetus is sufficiently different from that of the embryo to make to evident that a change of nature has occurred.
Nonsense.
Life begins with birth. This is proper jewish theology and belief (btw: so much for common "judeo-christian" values)
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-beginning-of-life-in-judaism/
If everyone would quit saying and writing on legal documents the word abortion and start using the correct word, infanticide you would win your court cases for these helpless murder victim's. Blessings to you all who are trying to save these little victim's of murder.
It's interesting because it raises the question what does make your cells part of your body ? that they have a genetic number plate registered to this human being ? that the brain knows they are there and is using them purposefully? An embryo doesn't have a brain so something else is guiding this cell development and function, what is that ? I think it has a functioning heart before it starts to grow a brain.
But it doesn't meet the criteria for a living organism.
Life does not begin at conception. life began once, during the abiogenesis of the first cell.
Human life does not begin at conception. Human life began during the inception of the first human.
What you have at conception is a living, distinct, human ORGANISM(not human being).
Human organism=/=human being. A human being is a being that is human, and by being I mean entity, which is a thing with distinct and independant existence. AKA, it isn't until birth where we have a human being.
If you want to redefine human being to be synonymous with human organism for an argument, whatever, because I reject that being a human being in this manner is at all relevant.
Also, human cancerous tumors are living, distinct, and human in nature. Bacteria are organisms. Combining these qualifiers to get the qualifier of human organism is meaningless. It is the combination of two irrelevant characteristics.
I also ignored the "whole" part, because that literally begs the question. Skin cells are whole skin cells. Whether or not it is a whole or part of something else really depends on relation. It's meaningless as well, because bacteria are whole in their own way. That means nothing though.
No unborn is an individual, because an individual is a being that exists independantly, and the fetus does not until birth.
Having a unique genetic code definitly does not make a case for being a new life.
I now am fully on board with artificial wombs In the hopes that it gives life an even greater chance.
If life begins at conception, are you telling me that test tube babies can live on it's own? You need a uterus to attach it to. That's when it's really alive, stop this nonsense. That's like sticking an egg from conception into a man and it will live. Or grow a baby from only a test tube to prove life can exist.
And I can fly
Anytime you move away from a scientific argument to a philosophical argument that involves giving or taking away the rights of other humans that is an argument I’m terrified of because that argument has enslaved and killed many people even in western civilizations history…
Hey I saw her debate somebody on Skype news and she was great and I’m so happy I found where she’s from. I want to interview her one day myself!
See also this video by Dr. Maureen Condic who makes this even more clear – here she explains the difference between organisms and cells, and whether a human organism exists from the time of egg-sperm union (it does). https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=112... This video by Dr. Condic does not contracict the one by Megan Almon, but goes further and explains more – but it is longer – about 50 minutes – and very worthwhile.
When Megan Almon talks about conception here, she is actually speaking about "sperm-egg fusion" which used to be defined as conception. In very recent times, "conception" has been redefined by some, but nonetheless, everything that Megan said about "conception" is correct if you are thinking of conception in the traditional meaning of "sperm-egg fusion." What I did not hear, unless I just missed is that the tiny human organism "directs its own development" which is something that has been pointed out by Dr. Maureen Condic, an Associate professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah. A skin cell can only multiply to become another skin cell, or a kidney can only give rise to another kidney cell – but from the moment of egg sperm fusion, the zygote behaves differently than any egg or any sperm. As Dr. Condic says, "Human embryos from the one-cell (zygote) stage forward show uniquely integrated, organismal behavior that is unlike the behavior of mere human cells" – with a lot more information at https://lozierinstitute.org/a-scientific-view-of-when-life-begins/
Zygote