I will admit that it is not clear when a fetus becomes a human. In my mind it is somewhere between month 3 and month 6.
There are some guide lines created by society.
One guide line is when can a person who murders a pregnant woman be also charged with the homicide of the fetus. Generally this is when the woman in noticably pregnant, the baby is moving and responding to external stimulus. These effects are normally first seen between month 3 and 6.
Another guide line is when do people treat a miscarried fetus as a normal deceased person. By this I mean, giving the deceased a name, putting the deceased in a casket, have a funeral, wake, burial and marking the grave with a tombstone. Certainly these sort of rituals are almost never carried out for miscarried fetuses in the first trimester. As ugly as it may sound, most first trimester fetuses end up flushed down a toilet. Certainly no one who truely believed that a first trimester fetus was a full human being would tolerate flushing that human being down a toilet.
Thus, I have to conclude that a fetus is clearly not a human being during the first trimester. Exactly when the fetus becomes a human after the first trimester is not clear to me.
You forgot to mention the longstanding common law right of preborns to inherit property. Any preborn.
The fact is, I refuse to recognize a zygote as possessing the same moral and legal rights as a human that has been born into this world. I'm against the barbarity of partial birth, because it's obvious that it's killing a fully developed baby.
At the VERY least, pro-lifers should want women to NOT be undergoing surgical procedures and to take the Morning After pill, so that chances are no embryo has been destroyed, and there's only a small chance that it's preventing the blastocyst from attaching to the uterine wall. However, since it's invention they've been against it. Since women for all time, illegal or legal, will exercise this option, why not do it when the "life" is only a few hours old. Can you honestly compare a recently fertilized egg to a newborn, to a 10 year old, to an 60 year old?
Pcl is right in one way. When the life is naturally aborted early on, there's sadness, some regret over the "potential"(which is actually the root of so-called guilt of women who've had abortions) but there's no consideration of it as a child. And what of anencephalic babies born with nothing but a brain stem? They are alive(though not without assistance) but they can NEVER develop a life as we know it. Yet to prove a pro-life point, one of these families that had an anencephalic baby had to watch it die slowly, and witness organs that might have helped babies that had a chance at something real in life lose out on organs because of steady degradation.
You should be ashamed of trying to spew the following sh!t here at FR.
Certainly no one who truely(sic) believed that a first trimester fetus was a full human being (The fact is, you were a full human being just after conception, but your anatomy and physiology wasn't nearly as sophisticated as it appears to be now, in your delusions of godhood declarations regarding human beings. Before puberty, a child is not yet a full human being like it will be after onset of same. Want to margenalize all those at some arbitrary point of your future choosing, as your value system 'evolves'? Of course you could. Such gross evil has occurred in human history. It's time to bring such demonic idiocy to a halt, by accepting the truth, that every human lifetime begins at conception, whether in a petri dish or a fallopian tube. Your effort to establish that the beginning is not the beginning because you want to ignore the truth of the beginning and arbitrarily establish some other beginning point along the continue of individual lifetime is demented and agenda laden. There is not good reason to continue under such delusional thinking. Stop it!) would tolerate flushing that human being down a toilet. And you're trying your damndest to make that 'flushing' a non-human event; tragically, it is not a non-human event. You require a bit more edumacation to see that the zygote (that was who you were long ago, and you were you even then at that early point in your lifetime) seeks life support. An organism that seeks life support from its environment is a unit of individual life, even at the single cell stage in a lifetime of perhaps eighty or ninty years (may God grant that you live that long and more, if you so desire). If your little exercise is designed to hang a nebulous guilt in the air regarding the embryonic individual human beings that DO on occasion end up flushed unknowingly down the toilet, let me assure you, the tragedy is real, for the human species has lost an individual unique to the whole race due to inability to achieve life support at a crucial stage in that individual's lifetime already begun. There is no condemnation in such an accident, as you ought recognize; it is sad that an individual human, being completely human at that stage in a lifetime already begun, was unable to achieve life support from its environment. PERIOD..Thus, I have to conclude that a fetus is clearly not a human being during the first trimester. Exactly when the fetus becomes a human after the first trimester is not clear to me. Yeah, you would like for the truth to be so malleable, so negotiable, eh?
Try to reason this out: at what point, going backward from your now existence, was there not a you; at what point in the CONTINUUM that is the lifetime of pcl did the human status of pcl begin?
You say morals are outdated, then I say the above stated quote fits you nicely.
In your mind? Wow. What a powerful argument. Not.
Based on this muddled post it is obvious that many ,many things are not clear to you.