Let’s look into what science has to say about the beginning of human life. Some people wrongly conclude that the answer is simple and can be found in any elementary biology text; that is when a male sperm fuses with ( impregnates ) a female egg a new human being is created. This definition places the proverbial cart before the horse.

A better view of this process is the following: A human male produces a multitude bits of flesh ( single cells ) that he gives them to a female, where she incorporates one of his bits of flesh into a single cell of her flesh. This flesh of her’s, now infused with genetic information from a male,  begins to grow and develop into a fetus that is being readied to become, normally at birth, a new individual human being that a moral civil human society is obligated to endow with inalienable human rights and freedoms.

How can a rational, without religious biases, person consider a single cell, when a sperm fuses with an egg, to be a person that should be afforded legal rights. In everyday normal life we don’t do this; do we say, “I’m going to the grocery to buy a dozen chicks and come back and cook 3 chicks with maybe some bacon.” or “Look at that beautiful sunflower, it must have a thousand sunflowers in its head.” or “Look at those cows over there” when pointing a pregnant cow. There is no valid reason to treat human beings any differently. 

Read this beautiful scientific abstract below that points to It’s the Breath of Life, as the proper beginning of human existence or life:  

“A simple definition of consciousness is sensory awareness of the body, the self, and the world. The fetus may be aware of the body, for example by perceiving pain. It reacts to touch, smell, and sound, and shows facial expressions responding to external stimuli. However, these reactions are probably preprogrammed and have a subcortical nonconscious origin. Furthermore, the fetus is almost continuously asleep and unconscious partially due to endogenous sedation. Conversely, the newborn infant can be awake, exhibit sensory awareness, and process memorized mental representations. It is also able to differentiate between self and nonself touch, express emotions, and show signs of shared feelings. Yet, it is unreflective, present oriented, and makes little reference to concept of him/herself. Newborn infants display features characteristic of what may be referred to as basic consciousness and they still have to undergo considerable maturation to reach the level of adult consciousness. The preterm infant, ex utero, may open its eyes and establish minimal eye contact with its mother. It also shows avoidance reactions to harmful stimuli. However, the thalamocortical connections are not yet fully established, which is why it can only reach a minimal level of consciousness.”. [Lagercrantz, H., Changeux, JP, The Emergence of Human Consciousness: From Fetal to Neonatal Life, Pediatr Res 65, 255-260 (2009).

It’s the Breath of Life, or viability, is the heads side of the coin of life with the tails side being brain death at the end of life. This brain death can result from a deadly accident, intentional murder, old age, terminal illness or unsuccessful life saving medical treatment. The saddest circumstance is when a person is clinically brain dead, yet their human flesh still lives through artificial medical means, and the family has to pull the plug because only a miracle can resurrect the clinically dead person. There is no cry to keep the living flesh of all brain dead people alive for as long as possible. Again, there is more to a human being than just flesh and blood.

You would think that people who really/truly believe that human life begins at conception, generally anti-abortionists, would show more concern about miscarriages. Before viability you could say miscarriages come in 2 forms, unintentional miscarriages through natural causes and intentional miscarriages through the use of abortion. Anti-abortionists that believe an unviable fetus is a human being, with a personhood that needs protection, should also be concerned with protecting these unviable fetuses from natural miscarriages; just as we require seat belts or other safety measures in society. Where are the laws the would restrict a pregnant Mother’s daily activities so as to prevent some natural miscarriages and thus legally protect an unviable fetus and save human life. Would not America and God praise this development ? No, No, No. Mothers should not legally be treated as cows with their primary and only purpose in life is the producing offspring.