(June 9, 2021 at 2:05 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: We know what it means to be an organism (as opposed to an organ or tissue). We know conception is the beginning of a new organism and everything else is development (at least for sexual reproduction). We know what it means to be taxonomically human (as opposed to another ape). And we more or less know what it means to be alive (as opposed to dead).
All these things together are how we can identify a human.
The last few pages have been frustrating to read. The apology for the value of a human zygote goes like this:
1) Most people agree that humans (the children and adults we meet each day) have inherent value.
2) A human zygote has the modifier "human" in it.
3) Therefore a human zygote must have the same inherent value and protections.
No, no, no.
If you want to argue that potential children have the same value as children, have at it. It is a stupid proposition, and can only be justified by religion -- i.e. a magical soul being imparted at the moment of conception.
Don't try to claim that biology does this for you. "Look, it will develop into a baby if we give it nutrition and womb" doesn't cut it.
zygote != baby.
