Replies

Like I said, I'm not willing to (or capable of) argue with those who are certain that life begins at conception. I can never argue my way out of that.

I just see a distinction between being totally dependent on someone else's body for being alive, and being dependent on one's own body to be alive.

One requires the consent of another, the other doesn't.

It's a completely separate issue, and one that will ALWAYS exist, whether you like it or not.

Like I said, I'm not willing to (or capable of) argue with those who are certain that life begins at conception. I can never argue my way out of that.

I just see a distinction between being totally dependent on someone else's body for being alive, and being dependent on one's own body to be alive.

So we just therefore rationalize killing that "thing" to avoid all those messy consequences. Kuba-frickin-ya.

One requires the consent of another, the other doesn't.

I know of plenty of fathers paying child support against their consent because they provided the sperm. But women somehow have a right to kill the fetus when they supplied the egg.

It's a completely separate issue, and one that will ALWAYS exist, whether you like it or not.

So will many, many other human problems. The issue is, do we rationalize killing our little fetus problems or do we devise a way to deal with them without that rationalization?

Like I said, I'm not willing to (or capable of) argue with those who are certain that life begins at conception. I can never argue my way out of that.

Here's my answer (I detailed it a bit more in post 78):

Human life begins at conception. However, one is not "a fully functioning human being" at conception.