Why is murder punished? Is it because you are concious at the time of death? Or is it because one is being robbed of years of potential future life?
I don't see it as different just because the person is at a stage of their development when they don't have brain function. In the normal course of events, that person WILL have brain function and will hopefully go on to live a long, happy and rich life. Why is that potential protected in your case, but not in the case of a fetus as certain stages of development?
Also, surely this brain function argument fails anyway, because at 24 weeks as far as i can tell the baby has a formed brain and brain activity, yet in many countries you can still have an abortion. Is this really the yardstick we actually use when determining permitted abortion terms? If no, then why raise it now?
@Sangfroid - "The Courts have decided the mother has the final choice on the matter of carrying that collection to term." Not even close in most jurisdictions. The mother has a choice up to a pre-set limit, and from then on she is not permitted a choice at all.
All in all it seems to be quite arbitrary to say a baby becomes 'human' (in the sense that they have human rights) only at a certain point while in the womb, and that is our yardstick. I think deciding something is not 'human' and may therefore be killed at will is dangerous and damaging to the person who holds such views. You are using the very same argument that permitted the lawful killing of jews, negroes, newborns, disabled children, etc etc at various times in history, and will do again.
I would rather arrive at the same position as the rest of you, but without de-humanising the baby and instaed arguing on the basis of a compromise of the conflict between two people's rights, those of the mother and the child.
