Source for "it's a baby from conception"?

[Firiel]

And I was taught that Psalm 51 was specifically about King David crying out to God in repentence.

Context?! We don't need no stinking context!

[docmom]

I know you aren't suggesting I believe it, but I just wanted to confirm that I don't think life starts at conception. :)

I've heard my very conservative cousin make the following argument: At the moment of conception, there is a new and unique genetic code, indicating that life has started. An egg is just half of a woman's genetic code, and a sperm is just half of a man's genetic code. New life happens when they first join together and create a new genetic entity.

Said cousin is an identical twin, so I want to ask him who became human first-- him or his brother. Or ask him if they really are different people because they have the same DNA.

This is fun. You should also ask him about diploid ova and sperm- some don't go through meiosis correctly and end up with twice the number of chromosomes. As almost all divisions result in minor genetic changes the diploid sperm will have a "unique" genetic code. If fertilization occurs the resulting zygote will be triploid. This actually happens fairly frequently- up to 10% of all spontaneous abortions are due to polyploidy. So, if a sperm (it's more common in sperm) is actually diploid is it life? And just to blow minds, what about the process of taking one woman's egg, removing the nucleus, replacing it with the nucleus of another woman and then fertilizing it with sperm from a man? What about cloning- it's not unique DNA and doesn't result from two different individuals?

[Firiel]

This is fun. You should also ask him about diploid ova and sperm- some don't go through meiosis correctly and end up with twice the number of chromosomes. As almost all divisions result in minor genetic changes the diploid sperm will have a "unique" genetic code. If fertilization occurs the resulting zygote will be triploid. This actually happens fairly frequently- up to 10% of all spontaneous abortions are due to polyploidy. So, if a sperm (it's more common in sperm) is actually diploid is it life? And just to blow minds, what about the process of taking one woman's egg, removing the nucleus, replacing it with the nucleus of another woman and then fertilizing it with sperm from a man? What about cloning- it's not unique DNA and doesn't result from two different individuals?

She's a witch! Burn her!

I wonder what they say about human chimeras, where two zygotes that would become fraternal twins combine into a single embryo and result in a healthy fetus/baby with two full sets of DNA.

[Ivycoveredtower]

I know you aren't suggesting I believe it, but I just wanted to confirm that I don't think life starts at conception. :)

I've heard my very conservative cousin make the following argument: At the moment of conception, there is a new and unique genetic code, indicating that life has started. An egg is just half of a woman's genetic code, and a sperm is just half of a man's genetic code. New life happens when they first join together and create a new genetic entity.

Said cousin is an identical twin, so I want to ask him who became human first-- him or his brother. Or ask him if they really are different people because they have the same DNA.

EDIT: My mom had a very early miscarriage, but her body didn't get the message and continued to "think" it was pregnant for a couple of months. As a child, I assumed I had a little brother or sister up in heaven.

isn't that what happened with the Erin Bates Paine and Chad Paine pregnancy?

[fun2beme]

Catholics used to believe in Limbo - a special place where unbaptized babies went since they couldn't go to heaven but were innocent babies who didn't deserve hell, but shouldn't be placed in purgatory with the repenting sinners either. One of the popes (can't remember which) recently did away with the concept of limbo and it's now the doctrine that such babies go to heaven.

Also, if you visit older Catholic cemeteries, you'll see that many babies are buried in the back of the cemetaries since they weren't thought to be in heaven. Makes no sense to me but that's how things were. Even as a young girl, I felt bad for them and would pull up dandelions to put on their graves.

However, I do find it interesting that several headlines are proclaiming that Prince William and Duchess Kate are having a baby. I don't think she can be more than 8 weeks along at this point.

[jerkit]

Catholics used to believe in Limbo - a special place where unbaptized babies went since they couldn't go to heaven but were innocent babies who didn't deserve hell, but shouldn't be placed in purgatory with the repenting sinners either. One of the popes (can't remember which) recently did away with the concept of limbo and it's now the doctrine that such babies go to heaven.

Also, if you visit older Catholic cemeteries, you'll see that many babies are buried in the back of the cemetaries since they weren't thought to be in heaven. Makes no sense to me but that's how things were. Even as a young girl, I felt bad for them and would pull up dandelions to put on their graves.

However, I do find it interesting that several headlines are proclaiming that Prince William and Duchess Kate are having a baby. I don't think she can be more than 8 weeks along at this point.

I think they've announced both of her pregnancies early because of HG, to prevent speculation.

[fun2beme]

I think they've announced both of her pregnancies early because of HG, to prevent speculation.

I'm sure that's the case and think it's horrible that they have to announce it so early in the horrible event that she miscarries. I was thinking more along the lines of the media specifically calling it a baby at 8 weeks, in light of this thread where we're discussing the scientific terminology. Granted, saying she's expecting an embryo would sound odd...

[2xx1xy1JD]

Nothing wrong with saying she's going to have a baby. Future tense. If all goes well, there will be a baby in several months.

What would be weird is pretending that the baby is here, now, with all rights and royal protocols. "The Duke and Duchess and Royal Fetus request the honour of your presence...." is not something you'll see on a royal invitation.

[fun2beme]

Nothing wrong with saying she's going to have a baby. Future tense. If all goes well, there will be a baby in several months.

What would be weird is pretending that the baby is here, now, with all rights and royal protocols. "The Duke and Duchess and Royal Fetus request the honour of your presence...." is not something you'll see on a royal invitation.

I get your point about the future tense. I was referring to how some people feel about "it's not a baby, it's a fetus/embryo/etc," but there isn't much outcry over the royal family referring to it as a baby this early which I thought was interesting in light of this thread title.

[docmom]

I believe the actual wording was along the lines of the couple are EXPECTING a baby. Which is reasonable because they are expecting that the outcome of the pregnancy will be a baby. The issue comes when someone else insists that what you have in your body at a given moment is a baby when to you it is an embryo or a fetus. You, however, can call it whatever you want.

[Coco]

I believe the actual wording was along the lines of the couple are EXPECTING a baby. Which is reasonable because they are expecting that the outcome of the pregnancy will be a baby. The issue comes when someone else insists that what you have in your body at a given moment is a baby when to you it is an embryo or a fetus. You, however, can call it whatever you want.

Like Jill Rodrigues calling her sister's pregnancy a "three-month old baby in her womb" viewtopic.php?f=198&t=22691&hilit=#p766451

[RosyDaisy]

Wow. I was horrified when a Calvinist pastor told me that his denomination believed babies of non-Christians went to hell. At least the parents of supposedly-in-hell babies were largely unaffected because, well, non-Christians typically don't believe in hell. I can't even imagine saying that all dead/miscarried children go to hell. What a huge comfort to grieving parents! Don't worry about your miscarriage-- your child is in hell! You should try to have another child-- hopefully that one won't end up burning for eternity too! :|

Not according to Jesus:

Matthew 19:14 "but Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.â€

My interpretation of that passages is that all babies and children go to heaven.

[RosyDaisy]

Wow. I was horrified when a Calvinist pastor told me that his denomination believed babies of non-Christians went to hell. At least the parents of supposedly-in-hell babies were largely unaffected because, well, non-Christians typically don't believe in hell. I can't even imagine saying that all dead/miscarried children go to hell. What a huge comfort to grieving parents! Don't worry about your miscarriage-- your child is in hell! You should try to have another child-- hopefully that one won't end up burning for eternity too! :|

Not according to Jesus:

Matthew 18:3 “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Mark 10:13-16 "And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.†And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands on them."

My interpretation of those passages is that all babies and children go to heaven.