From: nadja@jetsun.weitek.COM (Nadja Adolf)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Defying Physics (Re: In Suzanne's Defense)
Date: 10 Oct 92 02:17:09 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Oct9.191443.11469@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c164-ad@po.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero) writes:
>In response to the sperm/egg debate again:

>Can a human individual be at two places at once (when alive)?  Can
>Joe Blow be in La Jolla, and in Anchorage at the same time?  Of course,
>not.  Humans can only be in one place at one time.

Not so in New York. There the courts determined someone could be in two
places at the same time. Pretty weird, but it fits the flavor of your
argument. 

>Now someone asserts: Eggs/Sperm = human life (members of homo sapiens)

Eggs divided by sperm is assigned human life? Cute.
 
>Let us assume that the assertion is true.  

It isn't an assertion, it is an assignment statement. :-9 And it is
syntactically incorrect.

>If it is true, then we,
>at that point in time are both eggs and sperm (separated).  But how
>can this be?  Can we really be at two places at once?  Can our human lives
>begin before we are one?  Did the sperm that was you agree to meet up
>with the egg that is also you?  You cannot be two places at once, just like
>the sperm (which is you) and the egg (which is you).

Are you separating the eggs or the sperm? This is beginning to sound like a
recipe...

OK. Let's try it one last time.
1) Life began several billion years ago.
2) Eggs and sperm are alive, and if they are human eggs and sperm, they
   are human life.
3) Conception isn't the beginning of life, unless you assume that eggs and
   sperm are dead.
4) Fetuses are human life, too.
5) What difference does any of this make to the issue of abortion?


>We have a contradiction.  We once assumed eggs/serpm = human life
>(members of homo sapiens) but since we have a contradiction, it is safe
>to say that the alternate assertion, that eggs/sperm != human life
>(member of homo sapiens) is true.

Of course eggs/sperm != human life. Like I said up above, your assignment
statement was syntactically incorrect.


>Is it possible to have two humans in you? (I mean exactly the same human
>being one with another human in exactly the same space.  Thus, a pregnant
>woman and her unborn child, since they are not occupying the exact same
>space, are not one human entity).  I don't think so.

Yes, it is possible for women to have two humans inside them. This condition 
is called being 'pregnant with twins.' It is not possible for men to have
two humans in them, so I wouldn't worry about that missed period, Martin.

>So let us assume that the assertion that eggs/sperm = human life (members
>of homo sapiens) with the added assumption that the eggs and the sperm
>are two different human lives.  Since this is true, then at conception,
>two different human lives come together.  But the problem is, you are
>exactly one human entity.  So how can two separate human lives produce
>exactly one human entity?  Didn't we say that it is not possible to 
>be exactly two humans at one exact time?  From two human lives, there
>results only one human life.  This cannot be.  How can Joe Blow merge
>with Susan Parker (random name) to produce Joe Parker only?

If Joe Blow did not marry Susan Parker, and she chooses to name her son
Joe, in a common law state, her son Joe would have her surname and would
not legally be allowed to have his father's surname unless his father were
to legitamize him. Does that answer your question?

>Thus, since a human cannot exist as exactly two humans, we have a 
>contradiction.  We can safely say that the assertion that eggs/sperm
>are human life (members of homo sapiens) is false.

Technically, identical twins are one genotype. Since earlier you were
focussing on the unique genotype, by that criterion, a human can exist
as exactly two humans. Siamese twins are even in there, too.


-- 
The Earth Pig Bourne....

nadja@node.com (prefered email address)
nadja@weitek.com
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.flame