It is indisputable that normal “human life” is not created at the moment of conception. It is a fact that there is a difference between human tissue that is created at conception and a “human life”. There is no known case where a human life has been frozen solid, and lived.
Somebody get this person a biology textbook.
Whether a life is successfully frozen or not does not determine whether it is "life".
Someday, we may successfully freeze higher organisms and bring them back to life. Perhaps even human beings.
Then what?
The sole criterion for determining human life is whether the entity in question has the essential qualities of an organism; then it must be determined whether it is of the species homo sapiens.
Let’s look at the difference between living human tissue and human life. Fingernails, hair, skin, zygotes and other body tissue is human life. But it is not “alive” –it does not have the spark of life--in the sense that it does not have the attributes of a fully formed “human being”.
Is it me, or is this mystical, non-scientific language? The question here is one of science. Science does not deal in "sparks" but in facts and criteria. The blogger in question is not able to line up her observations with known facts and criteria about what constitutes "life".
