The Racist history of the Republican Party

[Rath]

Allfreedom99 said:

Rath said:

Allfreedom99 said:

defining personhood today is in debate as i see. Even if having a conscious defines a human as a person the human life that is developing in the womb will inevitably develop a conscious. It will inevitably be within the bounds of "personhood". a human life is human life whether its in its first stages in the womb or a 30 year old man. both have human DNA.

So if a fetus in the womb is a human being and will inevitably develop a conscious and be accepted into society as a "person" then what difference does it make if you end that life in the womb or as a 30 year old man?

The potential to have a consciousness in the future is not the same as having a consciousness in the present.

Also human DNA does not make something a person, a dead body also has human DNA.

I would still consider these as moot points. a dead body is gone. passed from life to death and will decay. a human in the womb consists of living cells developing as a human and a person in order to survive outside of the womb.

If we consider human life outside of the womb as having a right to live then one should also consider human life inside of a womb as having a right to live.

If you would consider me using a gun to blow the brains out of an individual who is unconscious or having no mental awareness right in front of your eyes to be a criminal act or murder then why isnt preventing a human being in the womb of a right to life a criminal act as well in your conscious?

As I said a person who is comatose has a consciousness, it's just kind of in standby mode.

A fetus does not have a consciousness at all.