It's quite simple actually. Current science proves a viable human being exists in the womb by the end of the 2nd trimester.
Things are rarely as clear cut as you believe dbl, but, for the purposes of this discussion, yes.
You may be right in that assessment, but in this case the viability of a fetus by week 24 (embryonic age - or 26 weeks by gestational age) is well established science. At that point the fetus's lungs have developed to the point of being capable of gas exchange - the last critical development necessary for it to exist outside the womb.
Aborting (killing) a human being is murder.
Mm. If I talked with a pregnant woman at 3 times during her pregnancy: Once at the end of the first month, at the end of the fourth, and then again at the end of the eight, during which of those conversations am I having a conversation with a woman who's put on a little weight, or who is carrying a human being inside her.
Classify those three encounters, if you would.
Sure, simple enough if we approach it from a strictly clinical point of view.
By the end of that 1st month, absent the experience of morning sickness, I'd say you'd be conversing with someone who may have put on a very little weight.
By the end of the 4th month, quickening (palpable fetal movement in the womb) has been experienced for at least a couple of weeks and the fetal heartbeat is detectable by stethoscope; so I'm fairly certain the woman would consider this a human life.
By the end of the 8th month, the mother could give birth at any time and be fairly assured of the fetus's survival (in most cases at any rate). So I think there could be little question who you'd be conversing with.
Being a man of science, I have to go by what the science says, and not by the fact that I don't believe in a god or gods or flying spaghetti monsters.
As I said before, I don't think this is actually how you think. But I don't know you, so I might be wrong. But the mindset I can sense behind this post differs from that which I've sensed behind most of all other writing of yours.
How do you think I actually think And what mindset is it you "sense" pray tell
I do know that a human life is a human life due the rights of all humans.
You sure I was under the impression that a human life was actually a martian life.
Yes, well... you forget who else is reading here. I feel compelled to state the obvious whenever Twerker is around.
It's not complicated at all. Science has proved that a fetus at the end of the 2nd trimester is a viable human. Any objections to that must be ideological and not grounded in science.
That's not what I was referring to.
As two stances become ever more closer or similar, it becomes more complicated or lengthy to debate them.
Actually, I don't see the 2 positions all that close. If the fetus can exist outside the womb, it's deserving of personhood.
Now before that point, there you have a real debate.
And any objections to those who say such fetuses should not be murdered are also ideological in nature.
Mm. Actually, even objections to just the science itself could easily be non-ideological. If there couldn't be a scientific objection to a scientific idea then we would know no more than we ever did.
Quite true of course; but I'm quite confident that when it comes to fetal development scientists have successfully nailed the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb.
However, if you have some kind of scientific case that challenges this point, by all means feel free to make it.
I am not arguing this point from an ideological point of view, but from the POV of the science.
If I were arguing this from an ideological point of view, we'd be debating at what point after embryogenesis ends and fetal development begins does the fetus attain sentience.
So you may doubt me all you like, but I'm sticking strictly to the science.