Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
Their lives are discernible as the "lump of cells" may be destroyed with no harm to the mother's physical well being. If a life form begins its life as a parasite, depending on its host initially but growing to independence, isn't it still a life form? It's not like the woman is growing an extra kidney that will be absorbed into her body as a necessary part of it's function.
|
From your link:
Quote:
|
Life (cf. biota) is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have self-sustaining biological processes from those that do not–either because such functions have ceased (death), or else because they lack such functions and are classified as "inanimate."
|
Seeing how they are not self-sustaining I don't see how you can
classify them as a life-form when they're in the early stages of development.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
Even if it is a "lump of cells" at some point, when does it gain its humanity? To my knowledge their is no agreement on this point. Because of this, the abortion of a fetus raises the possibility, however slight, that a murder is being committed.
|
You'll have to clarify what you mean by humanity. There's certainly agreement as to when a fetus is not viable.
Statistically speaking fetuses don't survive outside the womb before 21.5 weeks of gestation (~5 months). Honestly, if a fetus is not alive, certainly not at the early stages of development, and can't survive on its own I can't see how that can be classified as murder.
Most states have similar position as they have a viability clause in their abortion statute. If it's viable it's murder, if it's not viable it isn't murder.