Biologists like lists and categories. Lots of them. In my very last biology class as a student, we talked about one such list, a list that describe the attributes of life. This class was virology, so obviously we were interested if viruses are even considered alive, which some push to the outskirts, if they are even life!
While there are a number of variations of lists that distinguish life from non-life, most overlap (example, second example, third example). I wondered how an unborn human baby would fair to such a list. So I put the unborn human to the test.
Living organisms have the following characteristics:
- Composed of cells: have cells which are highly organized for specific functions.
- Metabolism: capable of converting existing energy into a new usable form.
- Growth: taking external material for maintenance and growth.
- Stimulus Response: respond to stimuli in their environment.
- Adaptation: able to adapt to their environment between generations.
- Homeostasis: maintain balanced conditions internally.
- Reproduction: capable of procreation or cell division such as mitosis.
- Movement: capable of locomotion of some type.
So….does the unborn human baby have these characteristics?
- Composed of cells: Yes, very much so.
- Metabolism: Yes.
- Growth: Yes, they grow and grow!
- Stimulus Response: Yes they do.
- Adaptation: They happen to be human genetically, so yes.
- Homeostasis: Yes.
- Reproduction: Very much so!
- Movement: Yep!
Biologically, there is no question that the unborn human baby is alive! In fact, the baby is in the exact location that is designed for his/her stage of development. The woman’s womb and the formation of the placenta are specifically designed for that new life. The most technologically advanced and safest baby incubator on earth has sadly become one of the most dangerous locations for babies. The baby is supposed to be there, it is the natural teleology of life in general and humans specifically. Even if the parents don’t want it, it’s still an alive human baby!
You will not want to miss the next posts. If you found this one helpful, you will want to keep an eye open for others. The best way is to click here, because you can get them straight to your inbox so you don’t miss out! (Click here.)
Do you have other reasons why abortion is wrong? Please share them below! Or, do you disagree with me? Feel free to share below!
20 thoughts on “Are Unborn Human Babies Alive? A Biological Perspective Of Life.”
Wow you just said yes to every one of those things without any type of explanation. You think thats winning anyone over?
What I’m stating is standard biological evidence, all biologists know what I said is true. Do you disagree with any of those “yeses”? If so why? What evidence do you have?
Wheres your cites and sources? If “all biologists” agree with you, then where’s your proof? I’m not debating on wether or not I agree with anything you listed, my point is that you carried out this article somewhat poorly.
I’d suggest you read any introduction to biology text book…it’s common knowledge.
I suggest you do a better job of initially persuading your audience.
I linked, in the text, to three sources. If you want more, I can provide that. Also, if you want me to link to the text book I used when I was taking graduate virology, I would be happy to do that too.
Not All if those things happen right away obviously. A baby is alive later in the pregnancy but not at conception
Actually, yes. All of those things happen right away from the time of fertilization. This is one of the reasons why abortion is so hideous and evil.
Sources? Saying “yes” without a source is useless. Some people actually use information to form opinions rather than a biased website without a source
Sources? Yes. Feel free to read the text before commenting! I gave three external sources and two internal sources. Also, I’m a biologists, I have taught biology at the high school level and do still teach biology at the college level. Here is my question for you, what is your scientific, unbiased, rational argument why the unborn baby in his or her mother’s womb is not a living human person?
this is probably the most biased site i have ever seen. yes the baby does all of these but not without relying on the mother. most scientists are pro choice. and, daniel, you’re a guy, you don’t have a reproductive system, you are never going to be pregnant and have to deal with the emotional and physical distress of having a baby. it’s not your choice and you really don’t have a say in the matter. women are not incubators.
Thanks for commenting. In response to your first comment, “this is probably the most biased site i have ever seen,” every site is biased. If one had no bias, one would not know what one was talking about because one would not have any knowledge about the topic. In response to your second point “yes the baby does all of these but not without relying on the mother,” I’m not sure what one’s level of dependency has to do with one’s status as a human. To your third point “most scientists are pro choice”, first that is an appeal to authority and second it is your opinion. Where’s the evidence? To your next point “and, daniel, you’re a guy, you don’t have a reproductive system, you are never going to be pregnant and have to deal with the emotional and physical distress of having a baby.” First off, I’m am a guy and last time I checked guys do have reproductive systems. Second, just because I can’t actually carry the baby does not mean I can’t point out the evil of murdering babies. To your next point, “it’s not your choice and you really don’t have a say in the matter,” sorry, the parents choice started much earlier before pregnancy. No one has moral right to murder another human baby. To your last point, “women are not incubators.” I’m not sure who said woman are. Woman carry the baby.
Pretty sure they don’t preform homeostasis the mom basically dose it for it but ok
In one sense the mom does help, however, no matter what one’s since, no matter if it is at the one cell stage or fully grown human, we all homeostatic process going on constantly. This could include temperature, but it often includes other things, like regulation of salts, water, sugars, minerals, and even gene regulation.
I do agree with most of what is said, but don’t you think then, that we should not kill any living organism, such as bacteria, and therefore abolish any kind of antibiotics?
Being alive doesn’t mean that you should not kill something. A plant, a bug and yes, a bacterium are all alive….but we kill those all the them. Being alive is not the only criteria, it’s one of many criteria that help us see that the human unborn have value and should not be murdered.
The entire article is aimed to explain that fetuses are alive, as an attempt to accuse pro-choice people of killing something alive, and now you’re saying that it doesn’t prove anything? I mean, I see your point, I just don’t see the relevance. And what are the other criteria? Neurological activity? cause as far as I know all animals have it.
Think of a Venn diagram, a number of things have to overlap. For example, your skin cells are alive, but that is not enough to say that you should not kill one of your skin cells. Your skin cells are human, but that is not enough to say you should not kill one of your skin cells. A bacteria is an organism, but that is not enough to say you shouldn’t kill a bacterium. A bacterium is alive, but that is not enough to say that you should not kill a bacterium. A bacterium and your skin cell both have DNA, but that is not enough to say that you should not kill either.
Here are at least four things needed in a Venn diagram:
1. Genetically it is a human, with human DNA, Human markers, Human cells, etc.
2. It has unique human cells, DNA, etc.
3. It is an full human organism (not bacterial, etc.).
4. It is an alive human organism.
5. The human unborn is a proper part of human reproduction.
So is a sperm cell, (except for point 3, but frankly no fetus is a “full human organism” until the very last weeks.)
No, the sperm cell nor the egg cell are a living human being. Neither have a full human genome individually. Concerning the fetus, yes, it is a full, genetically distinct human being from the point of conception. At each stage of development, it is living, it is human, and it has a full unique human genome. The criteria of one’s developmental stage is a horrendous method to define one’s person-hood status. For example, an infant doesn’t have a fully developed reproductive system. But that doesn’t make him or her less of a human.