Abortion not allowed

[fr0d0]

His position that a fertilised egg is a human is quite solidly grounded. That is the consensus amongst scientists too. Is the beginning of the human life cycle quite apart from the rest of the process inside and outside of the mother's womb. So it's not only rational, but publicly accepted by medical professionals.

Yes, we all agree that it's human and alive. We were talking to a teenage boy and I was willing to give him some slack on being confused in thinking what's being asked is what makes something living human tissue. You're old enough to know that what we want to know is what he thinks makes something a human being, a person.

No. There's a distinction to be made between human being and person. Personhood draws in all sorts of other considerations, which is a deliberate attempt to muddy the discussion. That is: sentience, self awareness. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle. A human is created at that point.

On the other hand, esq has argued vociferously that God would be acting immorally in talking the lives of babies. It's an amusing double standard. And serves to show the weakness with which he regards his own argument.

If Esquire had argued that God is wrong for taking the lives of fetuses, you might have a point. I'm pretty sure he was talking about taking the lives of human infants. Wrong for humans to do, wrong for God to do. What double standard?

Mothers with unborn babies that were both killed isn't immoral? I guess Esq is on Gods side in that judgement then.
Why is the taking of life always wrong? This is what Esq says. It's ALWAYS wrong. But only sentient life. Why is that wrong? Why can't it ever be just to take life? Why is human sentience valued above other animal sentience?
I would agree that humans can't judge any other human... because we simply lack the knowledge to make that decision. God, in having that knowledge, can. Even on a one millisecond old sentient baby.