Sorry, but no, to be a "human being" you must ONLY conform to the dictionary definition of the phrase which according to the American Heritage Dictionary is
A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
If you fall into the trap that the pro abortionists set when they start arguing the meaning of the obvious you get lost in the debate. When I debate them I start with the obvious, that the fetus is indeed a human being. You point to the dictionary and it's case closed. Then it's up to them to justify why it's OK to chop up a human being and throw it into the trash. I point out to them that they wouldn't do this to a pet, and so on, all of a sudden it's a lot more difficult for them to keep it rational.
However, if you start arguing whether the fetus is a human being you'll be 30 minutes into the conversation and you'll still have to prove to them a point which has been settled a long time ago when the phrase "human being" was coined.
These conditions seem suitable; however, these conditions would also seem to designate young infants, the mentally handicapped, and even very decrepit old people as “non-humans”.
The point I was trying to make in this paper is that a human is a human, no matter what anyone says.
The fact that there's still a debate on this issue is unsettling to me. Hence, why I wrote about it.