> I know of no scientifically valid test that could be used (and recognized) to demonstrate the point at which a "soul" comes into being an enter a human body.
None exists at this time. This is not to say that none will exist in the future (measuring the mass of the moon was at one point an impossibility; now we can measure the mass of planets around other suns). However, it is not good jurisprudence to base important laws upon things that cannot be proven, or even demonstrated.
>They are, from a scientific point of view, not too much different from you or me.
Actually, not true. Early enough in embryonic development, the embryo has no nervous system. Prior to a nervous system, there is no pain, there is no awareness. Whether there is a "soul" or not is something I leave to the sort of people who like to argue how many angels can dance on John Edwards pinhead.
> And, if we are both lucky, you and I will someday be 80 year old human.
It is perhaps unwise to automatically assume that reachign 80 years of age would be "lucky." Death is hardly the wors tthing that can happen to a person. A life wasted and devoid of success, family, respect and love would be incredibly sucko... and merge that with a body being consumed by disease... death would be a boon.
Actually, not true. Early enough in embryonic development, the embryo has no nervous system. Prior to a nervous system, there is no pain, there is no awareness."
I also understand that newborns cannot write sentences on the internet.
Would you say that since infants lack something the rest of us "real humans" all have, that it is "actually, not true" that, from a scientific point of view, newborns aren't too much different from you and me?