Stop putting words into the mouths of others. ONCE AGAIN the terms are NOT mutually exclusive. I asked you once do you understand what that means? HMMM?
Where did I do that? Your experts never used the word "baby"...they, YOUR experts, used the correct terminology...
Every Person is a living human .. and every living human is a person. A dead human is not a person. If a zygote is not a person - then it is not a living human and vice versa. The two terms are interchangeable in the context of the abortion debate - the exception being arguments that claim sentience/cognition is not a requirement for something to be a human. So if one wishes to claim that something is "A Human" but not a Person then one is claiming that sentience is not required for something to be classified as "A Human" .
"Nothing to debate here" - Screams "I have no clue what I am talking about" -- the question of the OP - "IS" the abortion debate- and running around crying "NO NO NO" as you have done - does not change this fact. And running around crying "its a human its a human" is not an argument for anything. A zygote is not made of "Living cells and Tissue" - the zygote is a single human cell. You correctly state that in order to show something is "A Human" one needs objective markets. You have claimed that having human DNA is the only marker - or at least that is the only characteristic you have given- which is nowhere close to an adequate definition. A claim without support - and you have not supported your DNA claim - is not worth much. Define the characteristics that you feel are required for an organism to be classifled as "A Human" - and then show how the zygote meets that definition. I agree that having Human DNA is "One" requirement - So no need to support this obviously true claim - what you need to support is your claim that this is the only requirment - or - if this is not your claim - state what the other requirements/characteristics are.
LOL - you have yet to figure out the difference between "A Human" - and "A Human Life" . Once again you repeat your premise "Its a human" giving zero support for claim. It is not up to others to refute your unsupported claim - it is up to you to show that your claim is true. That others have not refuted your claim - does not prove your claim true - another descent into mindless fallacy on your part. A zygote is "A zygote" - and you have been told this numerous times. A zygote is a human life form ... just as a heart cell is a human life form. Just because something is a human life form - does not make it "A Human" Get it .. got it .. Good
Once again you are projecting your failures onto others. Pointing out that you did not understand the difference between "Human life" and "A human" - in a discussion about what constitutes "a Human" vrs "human life" is not "Word Games". Do you have anything other than false accusation and fallacy mate ?
Would you debate 2 + 3 = 5? The idea of debating this would be absurd. It is equally absurd to debate the obvious fact the a fetus is a separate and distinct human being.
What is absurd is you talking about a fetus - in a conversation about a zygote What is doubly absurd - is you stating that a coherent definition of "A Human" is required - then running from the question "what is this coherent definition" What are these "Obvious Facts" which constitute your coherent definition of "A Human" .. So far you have stated "Human DNA" is a requirement - and got no debate from me on that obvious assertion .. so why are you blubbering on some debate that does not exist in this conversation - followed by repetition of claim fallacy ? Talk about "Absurd" ? Yes/No - is having human DNA the only requirment in your definition of "A Human"
You keep on with your specious distinctions without merit. As I have told you and quoted from the medical textbooks a human zygote is a human being from the moment of conception. Your misinformed fallacious layman opinions do not refute the facts.
1) Appeal to authority fallacy - Just because something is stated in a textbook - does not make it true - espectially if the claim in one textbook is contradicted by other textbooks. Textbooks contain all kinds of errors. 2) Whether from your mouth - or a quote from someone else in a textbook - an unsupported claim is not worth anything - (does not show that claim is true) - and neither you .. nor your quotes from laughably biased sources "Princeton EDU" supports the claim that a zygote is "A Living Human" What speciious distinction is without merit and why ? - do you have anything but nonsensical false accusations which you can't support. What facts - you have presented no facts that show a zygote is a human ? .. all you do is run around crying "its a human its a human" and posting sources that commit the same assumed premise fallacy .. so quit projecting your failings onto others. Either cite the fallacy I have commited .. and support your claim with something other than assumed premise fallacy - or admit defeat
So what? They use the FORMAL medical term which is not mutually exclusive of the layman's term baby? You seem to not understand the grammar here or are you just being obtuse again?
Posting of facts which you have not refuted, still waiting. You misinformed self-serving opinions do not refute the facts.
You have not posted any "Facts" that constitue legitimate support for claim - so there is nothing to refute. Repeating a claim over and over - like some parrot on a broken record - is fallacious nonsense - does not constitute support for claim What part of that fact do you not understand ?
Look - if you want to claim "Fallacious assertion" then state what that assertion was and why it was fallacious. You have not posted anything from a medical text that supports the claim " A zygote is a Human" - all you have posted is some moronic dotard claiming "A zygote is a human". - but gives no support for the stated claim. What part of "repetition of premise is not support for claim " do you not understand ?
What have I proved right ? You just yap for the sake of yapping .. never making any sense - or backing up claims .. spewing falsehood and fallacy - lacking ability to make coherent argument .. a friggen joke.
What a joke - how am I supposed to remember something I did not say.. back up your claim .. Mr. Lame .. cause you have yet to figure out the distinction between "A human life" and "A human" .
Is human sperm a human? Is human egg a human? All the question is about is where is the line in the sand drawn to determine human? And the law has to deal with said line as a human with all the rights afforded said human.
