“Okay, so a fetus may be scientifically alive at conception, but it’s not a person yet – so it’s okay to terminate it.”
This argument is basically stating that a fetus is not a person because it cannot live on its own, breathe air on its own, etc. Others may also make the point that no fetus has the right to use a woman’s body to survive against the woman’s will.
So how do we respond to these claims? First, a follow-up question: “Why isn’t it a person? If it’s not a person, then what is it?” Those on the pro-abortion side might say that it’s not a person, it’s a fetus. The issue with that argument is that the definition of the word “fetus,” according to the Cambridge Dictionary, is “a young human being…before birth.” Just as the word “toddler” means “a young child,” describing a later stage of human development, so the word “fetus” describes an earlier stage of human development. Fetus, infant, baby, toddler, adolescent, adult… they’re simply terms describing human beings at various stages of growth.
As science has already established, as soon as conception takes place, there is a unique human life. That life is of the human species–it’s not some other species. If you are human, you possess “personhood” by default. Human life is just that: human life. And since life begins at conception, so does personhood. The fetus has its own DNA, own blood type (that may be completely different from the mother), etc. Its hair, eye, and skin color have already been predetermined.
Every other time we’ve stripped a human of their personhood, the results have been disastrous (slavery, women not being allowed to vote, the holocaust, etc).
Others may also argue that since a fetus is dependent on its mother for survival, that the fetus is similar to a parasite and does not have the right to use its mother’s body to survive against her will. I would say that in most cases, no person has any moral obligation to use their body to keep another person alive. However, in the case of a mother/child relationship, the mother then has the parental obligation to keep that child alive.
The same argument can be applied to abuse. You can be made aware that your neighbor is abusing their child, but you don’t have a legal obligation to stop it. But, if you are abusing your own child, you will be legally prosecuted. This is because as a society, we recognize that the parent/child relationship is unique in that you have a moral obligation to your own child that no one else has to your child.
Simply put, parenthood isn’t convenient. You cannot end a child’s life (at any stage) because the child is inconvenient.
This is a unique, valuable, living, human being. The question is, is it ever okay to kill an innocent human being? The answer to that question is obviously, no.
Sources:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/fetus
