RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins?

RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Kirata -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:13:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SilverBoat Of course, the religious nuts will (or have) backtrack(ed), and assert that something like multi-re-conception occurs at the instant of mitosis. Or maybe that their god anticipated the split(s) and arranged for multiple souls at the moment of acrisomy. Or something else entirely. Any of those is every bit as good (or bad) as the claim that there can only be one soul or none at the time of conception. quote: ORIGINAL: SilverBoat The smarter nuts will realize they've been caught out and start weaseling, the dumber dupes will retreat into denial, citing 'authorities' and personal attacks. See the replies above (and possibly below) this for examples of that. Even smarter still would be to realize that this pseudo-intellectual crap-trap is riddled with assumptions and holes, and useful only for its value as humor. But, of course, there will be those who retreat into denial, insisting it's solid as a rock and calling people "nuts" and "dupes". K.

tazzygirl -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:35:10 AM)
This discussion is meaningless without first agreeing upon the terms --- Conception Implantation Soul Conception - Fertilisation (also known as conception, fecundation and syngamy) is the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism. In animals, the process involves the fusion of an ovum with a sperm, which eventually leads to the development of an embryo. Depending on the animal species, the process can occur within the body of the female in internal fertilisation, or outside (external fertilisation). The entire process of development of new individuals is called reproduction. Implantation - In humans, implantation is the stage at which the embryo adheres to the wall of the uterus, believed by some to be the beginning of pregnancy.[1] At this stage of prenatal development, the embryo is a blastocyst. It is by this adhesion that the fetus receives oxygen and nutrients from the mother to be able to grow. Implantation of a fertilized ovum is most likely to occur about 9 days after ovulation, ranging between 6 to 12 days.[2] Im sure at this point many can see the problem with the notion that "Life begins at conception"

farglebargle -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:35:37 AM)
For all the bullshit following, no-one has done any experiments to disprove the hypothesis, so maybe instead of pissing and moaning, y'all go do some science and report back your findings. To summarize. Your goal is to gather evidence to support or disprove the hypothesis than souls are indivisible. ( In accordance with the entirety of theology ) If you can prove that souls are not indivisible, then you have evidence for ensoullment beginning not at the quickening but rather conception.

Kirata -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:41:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle For all the bullshit following, no-one has done any experiments to disprove the hypothesis, so maybe instead of pissing and moaning, y'all go do some science and report back your findings. Hey, we're not going to play "Astrology" with you fargle. If you want to claim that there has to be either one soul or none at the time of conception, the obligation to back it up falls on you. Be sure and let us know how that works out, eh? K.

farglebargle -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:44:09 AM)
I already have provided reproducible, experimental evidence that the soul is -- in accordance with Christian dogma-- indivisible. Was there any question about the process?

SoftBonds -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:44:54 AM)
Fargle, I did answer you, the soul is indivisible but not restricted by your concept of time. So stop picking fights with yourself and go back to making love to yourself. (Not that I'm going to take my own advice mind you). On another note, if life begins at conception, then there was no life before I was conceived, yes? So I think you all owe me thanks for the existence of life. I prefer the thank yous to be expressed in US currency btw.

farglebargle -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:48:36 AM)
It's not about you, it's about your identical twin. Are you suggesting that your twin's soul is from the future or past, yet is still the same soul as the other twin? What we're being told by the crazies is that Conception == Soul. BUT we point out that Science says Identical Twins SPLIT AFTER CONCEPTION, so either fundamental dogma is incorrect, and souls are divisible and split between the twins ( Take your disagreements to Pope Nazi Youth... ) , OR souls aren't emplaced until sometime AFTER the twins split. So, is everyone in the Christian faith wrong when they say souls are indivisible, or are the minority who came up with this crazy, "souls get emplaced during conception" wrong?

Kirata -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:53:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle I already have provided reproducible, experimental evidence that the soul is -- in accordance with Christian dogma-- indivisible. Was there any question about the process? You haven't provided bupkis as far as evidence is concerned. And whether or not the soul is divisible is not at issue. The claim (and if I'm wrong about this, I'll welcome correction from any Catholics here) is that a new life begins at conception. Nothing about the soul in that. Having life does not equate to having a human soul. In fact, as best I recall, some time back a ways there was the notion that the embyo possessed a "vegetative soul," the fetus an "animal soul," and only later a human soul, when it had developed enough to be a suitable vessel for God to pop one in. Rather fanciful stuff, but it makes more sense than what you're peddling. K.

SoftBonds -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:57:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle It's not about you, it's about your identical twin. My identical twin is a figment of my imagination, so I can imagine a soul for him if I want to, goddess damn it. quote: Are you suggesting that your twin's soul is from the future or past, yet is still the same soul as the other twin? Identical twins generally act differently, I think it would make sense that after the soul went through one life in that body, it would make different choices. quote: What we're being told by the crazies is that Conception == Soul. BUT we point out that Science says Identical Twins SPLIT AFTER CONCEPTION, so either fundamental dogma is incorrect, and souls are divisible and split between the twins ( Take your disagreements to Pope Nazi Youth... ) , OR souls aren't emplaced until sometime AFTER the twins split. So, is everyone in the Christian faith wrong when they say souls are indivisible, or are the minority who came up with this crazy, "souls get emplaced during conception" wrong? Hey Hey HEY!!! I clearly stated I was not Christian, don't go expecting me to follow their logic or beliefs. That is just uncool man.

farglebargle -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:57:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle I already have provided reproducible, experimental evidence that the soul is -- in accordance with Christian dogma-- indivisible. Was there any question about the process? You haven't provided bupkis as far as evidence is concerned. And whether or not the soul is divisible is not at issue. The claim (and if I'm wrong about this, I'll welcome correction from any Catholics here) is that a new life begins at conception. Nothing about the soul there. Having life does not equate to having a human soul. In fact, as I recall, there was some time back a ways the notion that the embyo possessed a "vegetative soul," the fetus an "animal soul," and only later did it acquire a human soul, when it had developed enough to be a suitable vessel for God to pop one in. All rather fanciful stuff in my view, but it has the dubious advantage of making more sense than what you're peddling. K. "whether or not the soul is divisible is not at issue", is a really weird way of saying "is the entire premise behind the thread". "New Life"? There is no "New Life" The egg is alive. The sperm is alive. Life is a CONTINUUM. And since no-one questions cutting out cancer ( which is also alive ) then the ENTIRE FUCKING ISSUE IS WHAT MAKES THAT TISSUE SPECIAL. And if it's not a soul which makes it special, what the fuck does? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

DarqueMirror -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 9:57:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Monozygotic (i.e. identical) twins divide after conception. Either the soul must be divisible or it does not come into existance at conception but at some later stage. Indivisible soul at conception is demonstrably not possible, unless you insist that identical twins are of the devil. Science. It works, bitches. You know, we argue quite a bit on these threads (hell, I argue with everyone). But this is an EXCELLENT point for those lovely zealots who love to toss around words like "soul" and "sin" and such about the abortion debate. I found a link once that suggested that even the Catholic church hasn't always "agreed" when the soul enters the body (ie when life begins) because for hundreds of years they thought that the soul waited 40 days to enter the body (60 for girls). It's only recently, in the whole abortion debate dust-up that suddenly they just "know" when life begins........bullshit.

Kirata -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:01:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "New Life"? There is no "New Life" The egg is alive. The sperm is alive. Life is a CONTINUUM. This kind of shit-for-brains semantics is what makes the Talmud such a great insomnia cure. [:D] K.

SoftBonds -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:03:09 AM)
Interesting point for this issue. The argument against abortion is that a life is ended. This makes it OK to put a woman through pregnancy to support the life. Logically, if a pro-choice woman and I went to a fertility clinic and created a fertilized ovum, we should be able to find a woman in the protests outside the abortion clinic who would be willing to implant that egg in her own body to save that life, yes? If not, then that woman would be a hypocrite, correct? By similar logic, anyone who protests abortion needs to get a bone marrow test, to see if they can donate bone marrow to save lives of people with leukemia. And if they match, having someone cut open their upper thigh and drill a hole in their bone to pull out bone marrow should be a small sacrifice, after all, they are saving a life, what is a little pain and suffering and convalescence? Then there is kidney donation, etc. etc. etc...

PatrickG38 -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:05:32 AM)
Or the concept of a 'soul' is silly in the first place.

SoftBonds -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:07:30 AM)
I have two soles, one on each foot.

SternSkipper -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:15:27 AM)
quote: unless you insist that identical twins are of the devil. Maybe that is why that old wives tale got started... The GOP thinking ahead.

farglebargle -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:22:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle "New Life"? There is no "New Life" The egg is alive. The sperm is alive. Life is a CONTINUUM. This kind of shit-for-brains semantics is what makes the Talmud such a great insomnia cure. [:D] K. You are confusing me. Are you saying that sperm isn't alive or that the egg isn't alive?

SternSkipper -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:24:26 AM)
quote: There's another caller waiting who is concerned about the number of angels that can REALLY fit on the head of a pin... What do you think about that question, fargle? You two have GOT to take this onto internet radio as a sunday morning IRadio talkshow! Think of how you two can 'help' society.... And without any of the messy liability issues Kevorkian had.

Kirata -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:26:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle You are confusing me. It just seems that way. Anybody who would draw a analogy between a fetus and a cancer was confused long before I came along. K.

GreedyTop -> RE: OK, if the soul begins from conception, then what about identical twins? (2/19/2012 10:31:29 AM)
quote: "New Life"? There is no "New Life" The egg is alive. The sperm is alive. Life is a CONTINUUM. ooooh.. nice nod to one of my favorite George Carlin bits! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM&feature=fvst (at about 3:34)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875