Why did Jesus suffer for sinners and not victims

[The Architect Of Fate]

Significance doesn't exist in nature. It exists in the minds of the people doing the interpreting. What's significant for you, or me, or the law, may differ. 

But doesn't that speak to the opposite point (our point)? I think what Helios and I are questioning is the unjustified placing of such (unjustified?) significance upon a single event. There are a series of events involved and a wholeness exists between them.

As far as the debate goes, the signs and semiotics of the abortion debate are probably more important than the objective biology. Emotional and ideological reasons run on signs.

For biology, though, meeting in a bar isn't the creation of a new discrete object with the necessary genetic material. Fertilization is. Meeting in a bar may or may not lead to fertilization, but it isn't fertilization.

I think personhood is the issue here. When can we say that what exists (whether it be a collection of cells or a zygote) is a person and has what moral rights may be granted by personhood? That's the ultimate question.

And a person isn't defined as "that which follows naturally from one discrete object." Of what does "personhood" consist? My example with totipotent cells showed that instead of one, two or more people may come to exist from the state of those cells existing, and that potential individuals will either come to exist or NOT come to exist based on what happens to those cells in that state. Nothing before or after that process can create THOSE specific persons.

@John 6IX Breezy

Read up on totipotent cells. In humans, they are formed after fertilization, but BEFORE any one individual person becomes inevitable from the gestation process.

 I think they say something important about the issue. Whether you agree or disagree, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter.