joggle's Journal: Is a fertilized egg a human being?

I know abortion is a touchy subject so I'm just focusing on one key question. Is a fertilized egg a human being and, implicitly, deserving of all of the rights of a human being? Many people, at least in the US, believe this is the case and are therefore opposed to abortion (and even birth control). They believe this because either a) their interpretation of the Bible and/or b) their knowledge that a fertilized egg may grow within a woman until it is undoubtedly a human being.

To me, there are a few problems with either belief. For one, there are significant differences between a zygote (fertilized egg) and a baby that is born 9 months after conception. A zygote may, in the course of development, split into two separate individuals. This is how identical twins are formed. No person in the world can split in two and be two function people afterwards. In rare cases two separate zygotes my join early in conception, even of the opposite sex, creating chimeras and hermaphrodites. In extremely rare cases a zygote may split and then join back together at a later time. This is also something that is impossible for baby's or any other human to do.

If there is a soul, when does it attach to the zygote? If it is at conception, then does this soul split in two so that each identical twin has identical souls or does a single soul somehow control both twins? Does a chimera have two souls or does one somehow disassociate with one of the zygotes when this occurs?

Another problem I see with believing a zygote to be a human being is the frequent occurrence of their death. For example, there are many women who have great difficulty of becoming pregnant. By pregnant, I mean that the zygote has attached itself to the uterine wall. This doesn't mean that they are unable to form fertilized eggs however. In fact, many can form them at the same rate as any other woman (one or two per month) but they simply can't attach to the uterine wall. Would it be ethical to form a human being month after month with the full knowledge that they have no hope to survive? Should their passing be mourned as any other fetus would be mourned if there was a miscarriage?

It seems to me that people who view zygotes as human beings do so when it is convenient for them. When they want to fight abortion or contraceptives they view it as the intentional destruction of human beings. However, when they consider an infertile woman (who may, in fact, not be infertile just unable to become impregnated), they don't consider it to be the intentional destruction of human beings even though the result is identical to a normal woman who is taking a contraceptive pill. And when it comes to technical problems, such as chimeras and identical twins, they throw up their hands and act as if this isn't contrary to their view for some unspeakable/unknowable reason.

While faith is often viewed as the antithesis to logic, I disagree. I believe one can have faith without obvious contradictions (in this case, their conception of what a human is). One thing I can guarantee: if your concept of a human is that of a being similar to the people that you see on a daily basis, a zygote is about as different as you can possibly imagine and your concept of human would have to be very general to be able to include both under the same term.

One other question: if it is a human being, how far are you willing to go to save it? One potential problem that can occur is the zygote may impregnate itself into the fallopian tube of the woman, threatening the mother's life. The zygote has no chance to develop into a functional person and must be aborted. However, if research was done it may be possible to move the zygote to the uterine wall where it could develop. Would such research be worth it?