Replies

I do not ignore the idea; I just don’t believe it. However you view it, it has not been proven.

You still don't seem to comprehend the simple point that if you believe that "abortion is murder" then you are the one who has the burden of proof to establish your theory of what is a "person". I have only offered up the "implanted soul theory" as one of numerous possibilities which you cannot refute with any scientific evidence. Since I am neutral on the issue of abortion, I have no burden to prove anything because I am not proposing that government have any roll at all in getting involved in a conflict between a woman and the fetus she is bearing.

By what standard do I have to prove personhood? I advocate non-destruction, which is always the safe course of action. If one was to destroy human life – an Individual Human (which has been proven), it is that person’s responsibility to prove why it is just. Your assertion is that, though it may be a Human Life (More than a blob) and an individual life, it may be ok because we don’t know when personhood occurs.

When it can be proven and it turns out that personhood occurs at conception, are we to say “sorry” to all the “persons” we killed (40 million)?

We cannot base our course of action on a philosophical conundrum. We should instead use the data we have, which says that the fetus is an individual Human life. Not a part of human life, but a complete human by all scientific standards. Those that want to kill the Human must provide Proof of non-personhood. Those who actually want to kill have the burden, not I. That is only logical.

You should chose a side and not sit on the sideline. If you in-fact believe that we have souls, but do not know when it is joined with the Human anatomy. I would think you would protect the possibility of complete human life and personhood at conception.

“For a good man to do nothing”