Those facts are relevant nonetheless, and it is important to understand as much as possible so we can make informed laws, that are not just based on emotion or subjective opinion.
I see a pitfall in making the argument of when life begins
based upon scientific "facts" that may change or be chosen
ad hoc. An anti-abortion type might pick a different fact
that arises earlier...appearance of some physical feature.
If feeling pain is important, what if it's discovered that it's felt
much earlier? Then this "fact" could move the abortion threshold
date far earlier than is reasonable in light of the mother's right
to bodily autonomy.
Perhaps some scientific "fact" might make it prohibited
before she even discovers she's pregnant. So as we can
see, non-scientific factors are stronger than arbitrary
scientifically based milestones.
Well that seems like a false dichotomy fallacy, as we are not limited to either presumptions or absolute truths.
Tis not a fallacy to recognize that abortion rights & restrictions
will be a negotiated compromise between opposing factions.
To recognize the goals of each serves to understand how that
compromise will unfold. And to negotiate effectively with them.
This does not negate facts, there is wide disagreement between flat earhers, and those who accept the earth is rotund.
That is a strange non sequitur.
The shape of the Earth is directly observable
& testable, thus it's a scientific fact.
The morality of abortion is highly subjective
personal opinion, & "nicht einmal falsch".
"Rigorous scientific studies have found that the connections necessary to transmit signals from peripheral sensory nerves to the brain, as well as the brain structures necessary to process those signals, do not develop until at least 24 weeks of gestation, because it lacks these connections and structures, the fetus does not even have the physiological capacity to perceive pain until at least 24 weeks of gestation."
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In the UK The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agree.
"In reviewing the neuroanatomical and physiological evidence in the fetus, it was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the fetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation. After 24 weeks there is continuing development and elaboration of intracortical networks such that noxious stimuli in newborn preterm infants produce cortical responses. Such connections to the cortex are necessary for pain experience but not sufficient, as experience of external stimuli requires consciousness."
Beware hinging an argument of morality upon a technical
detail that might not even matter to one's opposition.
It smacks of bias confirmation, ie, the detail is chosen
because it supports one's view. If it did not, would it
even have been chosen?
Don't let a detail be the tail that wag the dog.
I'm not aware of any such right?
It is a right claimed by some....& that is a large
group that opposes abortion. They are part of
the political process that makes abortion laws
& legal rights for the parties involved.
A foetus never develops into a baby, it is a baby only after it is born.
Whuh?
The fetus certainly doesn't become a carrot.
It becomes a baby (usually).
Birth is an obvious assumption in the process.
Food for thought, but there is research showing that abortion rates are much higher in countries that criminalise it.
That's a practical matter that would favor abortion rights.
BTW, I'm not just "pro-choice"....I'm pro abortion.
The womb is part of the woman's body, and it can exist without the foetus as can the woman, the foetus cannot exist without the woman's body.
