[CSM]

"Does anyone else think that the case for Objectivism might actually be _stronger_ if it acknowledged that a developing fetus is a _living human being?_"

Good post. Thanks. I am in agreement that an embryo is a human being upon conception and abortion is nothing less than murder. I am surprised that Rand took this stance considering the emphasis she had placed on human intellect and consciousness, over the physical efforts of the human. I'm sensing some conflict in this stance of the physical being not being human, yet no considerations to the potential intellect of the developing human mind.

Did Ayn ever have an abortion?

[Smile-n-Win]

Did Ayn ever have an abortion?

As far as I know, she did not.

[secretagent]

I am in agreement that an embryo is a human being upon conception and abortion is nothing less than murder.

Do you then advocate changing the law so as to require prosecution for murder of anyone involved in the destruction of embryos?

[secretagent]

Never mind the vicious nonsense of claiming that an embryo has a 'right to life.' A piece of protoplasm has no rights—and no life in the human sense of the term. One may argue about the later stages of a pregnancy, but the essential issue concerns only the first three months. To equate a potential with an actual, is vicious; to advocate the sacrifice of the latter to the former, is unspeakable.

— Ayn Rand

http://www.abortionisprolife.com/reading.htm

She might have lowered her crossover point, from "protoplasm" to "human", if she had known more about fetal biology.