-->
@TWS1405
As such, there is NO child(ren) within the womb. None. That is just a FACT.
Sigh... Here we go...
I shall be using a biology dictionary and a medical dictionary since this is the nature of what we are discussing.
Offspring: New organisms produced by a living thing. [1]
As per the biology dictionary above on the entry for humans:
"The zygote that forms from fertilization divides mitotically and lodges in the uterus to develop into an embryo. The human embryo undergoes the following major embryonic stages: blastula » gastrula » neurula. The embryonic phase covers the first eight weeks of gestation. By the ninth week, the embryo develops into a fetus." [2]
An embryo is specifically called human by biologists for one simple reason, all humans begin their life process as an embryo. Think of it like being a tadpole before becoming a frog. We don't claim the tadpole isn't a frog, because it is one, just not a fully-developed frog. So a human embryo is still a human, we just call it a fetus or an embryo.
So an embryo also counts as an offspring, because the embryo is a new organism produced by a living thing. Therefore, embryos are both human offspring and also the first stage of life for a human.
This is why biologists state that human life begins at conception, even pro-abortion biologists will generally admit this fact.
However, you may argue that it is a cell. Well, human beings are simply collections of cells. This is evidenced from the entry for zygote from the same biology dictionary:
"The cells that sprung from the zygote will essentially have the same genetic composition throughout the body but eventually will acquire a special role or a distinct function as they are organized into tissues, organs, and systems." [3]
So why does it matter how the cells are arranged at all? I'm both cases it is merely cells. The tadpole and frog are both collections of cells. We do not claim a tadpole isn't a frog because it has fewer cells or a different structure. That is absurdity.
So the next question is why are humans different from tadpoles? This is the question of the soul. And there is no reason to believe that fetuses lack a soul. There is zero scientific justification for this. We also do not see a soul magically appear the second a baby is born. It comes out of the womb moving and even crying in some cases. This is clear evidence that fetuses have a soul.
So my question to you is why do you choose to ignore biological evidence? Why do you choose to ignore the cycle of life, the offspring created by us humans as human offspring, and choose to shut your ears to the biological facts that a baby is a baby even when it is an embryo?
SOURCES: