Okay. I'm bored, I'll dance. These are your explanations for why you consider a fetus to be a person:
Before this moment, aborting the Fetus is arguably as moral as uprooting a plant.
Yet then there are other issues; A plant does not have the ability to Become a child.
A Fetus probably does.
"Probably"? And this is your best one!
And exactly what is your point at all?
I said "Probably" primarily because the Fetus is not guaranteed to become a child.
I suggest you reanalyse my statement and actually say something that is relevant if you wish to discard it.
If you can't then don't bother, please.
It does not make me appear to be wrong, people reading your reply are more intelligent than that.
No, of course a fetus is not a person, otherwise abortion would always legally be referred to as murder.
But a Fetus is an individual Human body, and in definition, a person is an individual Human body.
A fetus is not a person but it is an individual human body just like a person (wtf). Sorry, it's either a person or it isn't.
And your point is?
Again you come to no logical explanation to discard the quote you are trying to make sound like it doesn't make sense.
My point was, if a fetus has the same basic value as a person, the killing of one has the same basic value as murder.
Although I do not stand by that, as I said, it is conditional, which you now try and ridicule in some way, as follows...
I believe that the only reason why a Fetus is not literally defined as a person is because abortions have happened and have been performed regularly for a very long time.
And If I am right, then aborting a Fetus is as bad as murder, and it should be law.
But I think that it is a conditional affair, and possibly at times the lesser of two wrongs.
So you consider murder a conditional affair?
It is obvious I do not consider "Murder" conditional.
I implied that killing the fetus is conditionally "Murder".
I'm sorry but I am getting the feeling you are trying to subtly insult me.
I am also highly inclined to believing such things, so I may well be wrong.
But if you wish to do so, Just do it in a private message, there's no need in making it public.
This still doesn't explain why a fetus should be considered a person. It's your assertion that it should be, but no reason as to why.
I wont humiliate you by offering more quotations as to where you're wrong, I'll just ask you to re-read my posts.
You can find one in a quotation not long before here in this post.
Again, you've made "fetus is person" the de facto starting position and then set up a false dichotomy that, if it can't be proven the other way, must mean your unevidence position is the correct one.
I have never advocated such a statement.
Please tell me where I have?
Please do not refer to my position as un-evidential either, when I have repeatedly shown you evidence which I have previously posted.
It's only opinionated, so don't treat it like I think my word is Law, either.
Furthermore, why is the killing of a conscious fetus, not as bad as that of a "person"?
This seems to make a clear distinction betweena fetus and a person. Also, this was your first response to the question of why you consider a fetus to be a person
It is not.
The first "response" was the 6th reply on this thread, go look.
and does nothing to answer that question.
You are entitled to your opinion, definitely.
But I believe that in asking that question I was going somewhere with it, before you assumed I side-stepped the initial question.
Also, I provided an interesting perspective on the original question posed at me, which is what I wanted to acheive.
You're very good at asserting that it should be so, I'll grant you that,
but you've done a very poor job in explaining why any of us should think that way too.
I'll try and improve, I guess.
First of all, you are referring to the wrong quote, it was the reference I made to my explanation of conscience I meant.
Your comment about conscience came after my question to you and did not answer it.
I apoligise then, I must have replied to that before I read your post which is where the confusion is coming from.
Secondly, the reference you are referring to is still relevant regardless.
"Furthermore, why is the killing of a conscious fetus, not as bad as that of a "person"?"
In using that I attempt to derive an opinion, in which I can either correct or agree with.
Also, I implied within the tonality of the question and in the context of the question, that;
Killing a conscious fetus may well be as bad as that of a "person".
In the context it is in, in reply to the adverse question, I hoped to achieve a relative comparison between a person and a Fetus.