Comrade Tovya said:
Okay, but like I said, what constitutes "personhood" as you so eloquently put it? If we are jumping back to the discussion as to when a baby can survive outside of the mother, then once again that has been proven to be more than two months sooner than Roe v Wade stipulated. And if we'd like to dive back into the "but the 19 week old baby survived on a machine" subject, than what happens when a child is carried to term (a full 9.5 months/40 weeks) and the baby requires "a machine" to survive anyway. Is it your assertion that it's still not a child because only the hospital staff is keeping such child alive? I which case, the hospital could technically refuse care* to the child because it is not technically reached "personhood".
*As we all know, U.S. law prohibits a hospital from refusing care to an individual for ANY reason, which includes the inability to take care of the fiscal responsibility of the visit.
|
Personhood is such a ridiculously contentious issue.
Some people believe that a baby does not become a person until it become self aware - which is around the age of two I think. Others believe it is when the fetus is viable outside the mothers womb. Others (including me) believe it is when brain activity starts. Others believe it is at conception.
The problem is there is no actual definition of a 'person', science can't help because it is a philisophical rather than scientific distinction.
