[user104658]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Because then it's a fully grown, fully fledged life. Fetuses can grow and survive outside of the womb at 22 weeks but even with medical assistance and good luck, there's still a low rate of survival. I don't think classifying a fetus before 30 weeks as a life is correct. To be uncouth, if you were to bake a cake but you pulled it out of the oven, it wouldn't a cake, it's a halfbaked bunch of ingredients.



I feel like the signifier for life for humans at least is the ability to exist outside the womb and not instantly die.

I just have to wonder why you're so against the idea of a fetus being classed as alive? I mean by any definition it is alive; it's a distinct cellular entity with its own DNA separate to the mother/father, it consumes, the cells divide and grow. That's pretty much it for something being defined as "alive". The criteria for "being alive" isn't very high. Bacteria is alive. And a fetus is genetically human... Thus, it has to be human life. In some form. Whether or not its a PERSON is a totally separate question. I'd find it hard to define a fetus as a person until very late stage pregnancy, maybe even birth.

The question of course is why does it matter? Like I said you seem really against it being classed as life. Is that because you'd be less comfortable with abortion if you thought of it as human life? Or maybe because you think it would be used to bully women out of having an abortion when it would be the best choice for them?

I don't know if I'm unusual in considering it to be a human life l, but still nonetheless being quite comfortable with abortion.

I even understand the worry that it will be used to pressure or bully women. Undoubtedly, it is. I probably wouldn't be so blunt about it if I was discussing abortion with someone considering an abortion...I'd probably go with the white lie. I just don't see the point in refusing to explore the grittier side of the argument in a purely hypothetical discussion.