TOP
Retired Teacher
Why not?Not relevant to my post.
Why not?Not relevant to my post.
Fertile eggs are chicken but they are very early in the development process. Using your definition baby chicks are not chickens because they can't have chickens yet. A baby chick and a fertilized egg have the same amount of chromosomes as a fully developed chicken therefore they are chickens.Chickens possess the ability to produce eggs.
Eggs do not possess this ability, so eggs are not chickens.
A Zygote is a human just a human in a very early stage of HUMAN development. I have had Human Development in Med School and we didn't start at birth we started after an egg had been fertilized by a sperm and becomes a human zygote .Agreed.
They're just pulling the same shit the gun-grabbing Lefties have been doing for years by labeling civilian semi-automatic rifles "weapons of war" and "assault weapons" not to mention other bullshit phrases like "white privilege".
Like Lefties want to ban guns, the Righties want to ban abortion. Aborting babies is murder. If they redefine a zygote as a "baby" like Lefties redefine firearms, then they can backdoor their way into banning abortion.
![]()
A Zygote is a human just a human in a very early stage of HUMAN development. I have had Human Development in Med School and we didn't start at birth we started after an egg had been fertilized by a sperm and becomes a human zygote .
Fertile eggs are chicken but they are very early in the development process. Using your definition baby chicks are not chickens because they can't have chickens yet. A baby chick and a fertilized egg have the same amount of chromosomes as a fully developed chicken therefore they are chickens.
Not a baby or a child, use science!
"Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd ed.," from publisher Wiley-Liss, asserts that fertilization is the "critical landmark" when a new, genetically distinct human organism is formed. Yet, the text explains, "life is a continuous process" throughout the pregnancy.
As Harvard University Medical School professor Micheline Matthews-Ross testified before a 1981 U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, "It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception … and that this developing human always is a member of our species in all stages of life" (New York Times, April 26, 1981).
In other words, Matthews-Ross was saying, a baby is a baby — from fertilization, to heartbeat, to birth. Yes, the baby of five weeks in the womb differs from the newborn, but so does the toddler differ from the teen. Scientifically, we pass through different stages as we grow, but we don't pass from person to non-person, or vice versa.
At that same 1981 government hearing, Dr. Watson A. Bowes of the University of Colorado Medical School asserted: "The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter — the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political or economic goals."
A fertilized egg has the same number of chromosomes and is therefore a chicken at its earliest stage of development. Anyone with 2 biology degrees and a medical degree knows that.Anyone who graduated HS should know a chicken egg isn't a chicken.
Anyone who graduated HS should know a chicken egg isn't a chicken.
Two very different issues but your point is a good one.
Dude, no, it isn't. Spin it with all the bullshit you can muster, but it's still not a chicken.If the egg is fertilized, the chicken egg *is a chicken*....
A fertilized egg has the same number of chromosomes and is therefore a chicken at its earliest stage of development. Anyone with 2 biology degrees and a medical degree knows that.
Why would you say a fertilized egg isn't a chicken
It has the complete set of Chromosomes of a chicken therefore its a chicken . The Chicken lifecycle begins with fertilization of and egg.Dude, no, it isn't. Spin it with all the bullshit you can muster, but it's still not a chicken.
Dude, no, it isn't. Spin it with all the bullshit you can muster, but it's still not a chicken.
ExactlyDude, one of us studied embryology and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t you lol.
By our laws you are not guilty of murder but ethically you just terminated a human life. Many people adopt out excess fertilized eggs to people that cannot have children otherwise.Spin away. That's exactly what all the fucking lying piece of shit Democrats do with gun laws; exactly the same thing you're doing. LOL
Dude, if I mixed an egg and some sperm in a test tube, verified fertilization and then destroyed it then by your whacky reality, I'm guilty of murder.
Anyone with 2 biology degrees and a medical degree who believes that's a murder case is being political and betraying every scientific and medical ethical standard.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who co-founded the abortion advocacy group NARAL and personally presided over 60,000 abortions, later confessed in the film "The Silent Scream" that "Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us."
Not a baby or a child, use science!
Fuckwit, they do fly. Just not very well because they are bred for weight, not flying ability. They can fly well enough to hop a fence or into a tree.
A baby is a born human being.
An egg becomes a blastocyst if it is fertilized, a blastocyst becomes an embryo if it continues to develop, an embryo becomes a fetus if it continues to be nurtured by its host, and so forth and so on, that is scientific.
Using science, it’s not a baby until born.