A fetus is a person from the moment of conception because that is when human life begins.
A Scientific View of When Life Begins
The conclusion that human life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested, objective, based on the universally accepted scientific method of distinguishing different cell types from each other and on ample scientific evidence (thousands of independent, peer-reviewed publications). Moreover, it is entirely independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos. Indeed, this definition does not directly address the central ethical question surrounding the embryo: What value ought society place on human life at the earliest stages of development? A neutral examination of the evidence merely establishes the onset of a new human life at a scientifically well-defined “moment of conception,” a conclusion that unequivocally indicates that human embryos from the one-cell stage forward are indeed living individuals of the human species; i.e., human beings.
That's not a factor in my analysis of the ethics of abortion. Why would it matter when some people think life begins? If somebody else said life doesn't begin until the first breath,that also wouldn't be a factor.
I consider only two factors:
[1] Is the fetus being tortured by the procedure? If no or very unlikely, then ...
[2] Who should decide whether an unwanted pregnancy goes to term, the potential mother, or the church using the power of the state to enforce its religious preferences on all?
I don't see the fetus suffering any more than I do a chicken embryo when you break open an egg and discover that it has been fertilized. I see no evidence of suffering there. You have to be conscious to suffer. I know this because of the headaches I have gone to sleep with and awakened with as well. Presumably, whatever was causing the pain when I was conscious is still the case when sleeping if it 's there upon awakening, but no consciousness means no headache and no suffering.
The soul comes into being at the moment of conception, and the soul is the person, whereas the body is just a vehicle that allows the soul to function.
Also not a factor for me. I have no such belief.
We're you giving a general argument against abortion, or just how you see it? If the latter, I have no comment apart from that's not what I believe, so not surprisingly, my conclusions are different from yours.
And killing the fetus is denying its right to life.
Also not a factor. I don't recognize such a right at that stage of development.
I thank you for not using the words murder and baby when describing abortion. It's killing a fetus (or embryo). Injecting such language in an attempt to persuade using an appeal to emotion, one of the logical fallacies.
Sorry it is "inconvenient" to carry a child to term for a few months of a woman's life, but she should have thought of all the things on this list below before she chose to have sex, not after.
But it's her call, not yours or mine. Your values only apply to you and those who also hold them. I don't disagree that both partners should be thoughtful, but I do disagree that if they are careless, that they are morally obligated to take the pregnancy to term. I was very impressed by the story of Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol becoming pregnant at 16 or 17. This is the human being with the most to lose by an unplanned pregnancy (in the Western world anyway, where they don't kill you for fornication) and the most incentive not to become pregnant.
Her mother was the outspoken and very visible governor of Alaska who was a staunch advocate of abstinence only advice in place of sexual education and contraception. There was not another human being on earth whose pregnancy was more likely to end up in the papers and lead to stigma for her and the wrath of her parents due to the public embarrassment of her mother and how a pregnancy reflected on her parenting skills and religious beliefs - a bit like the Duggars, who presented themselves to the world as exemplary Christians leading a life that anybody should want to emulate, only to have it come out that the oldest son had been diddling his sibs and was cheating on his wife. This kind of public humiliation should have been a huge disincentive for both of these people to engage in such behaviors, but what we saw in both cases as well as that of the Catholic clergy, is that it isn't. Sexual instincts often penetrate societal prohibitions, especially in the young who don't think as well or have the impulse control that they will when older.
So I find it unsatisfying to hear, "she should have thought about that when she had sex." Bristol Palin had a great deal of familial support for her teen pregnancy, but in another young woman, if she has to take a job as a waitress to support her baby, it might have meant the end of her schooling and any hope for a professional future. I understand that that doesn't matter as much to you as aborting the pregnancy, but if an abortion makes it possible to get her life back on course, I'm support her having that choice, and to have a baby in her time if she wants one.
There is no resolving these kinds of differences between us beyond this, because or values are so different. If I had your values, I would likely come to your conclusions, and vice versa.
Besides news, that is the only TV I watch. I have a passion for law and justice, always have. Some of those perpetrators deserve worse than the death penalty, it's too good for them. Do you understand what it is like to lose a child to a heinous murder? I am not a parent but I can put myself in their shoes. Many of these parents never recover, they have to live out the remaining days of their lives missing their child every single day.
