Originally Posted by will2power

The question is a moot one.

Rather than arguing what cannot be agreed upon by the scientific community, you should instead focus your attention towards something that might actually be effective in satisfying both parties.

Right to lifers are mad because they believe that the embryo has no protections under the law, essentially.

Pro Choice is mad because no woman wants to be forced by the state to carry a child to term. They feel what is being asked of them is invasive and Orwellian.

You have to look for an answer that is going to satisfy both groups, instead of pointless debate on who is right. Set aside the argument for a moment and think about it. What would actually make both sides happy?

Step with me into the what if machine for a moment... What if we expended our efforts into devising a way to nurture an embryo artificially to term? Or in other instances, a means to take that living embryo and implant it into a mother that cannot produce a fertile egg, or a mother who wants to have a child without a husband, or a volunteer? The rights of the embryo are protected, and at the same time the mother is absolved of her parental obligaition as well as the physical discomforts of pregnancy? Take it a step further and make a system where the genetic heritage of the child is kept on file devoid of any parenting information so that the child can have accurate medical care without exposing the parentage.

Streamline the process by allowing parents to fasttrack in the adoption process, instead of making the process take years to complete. Candidates medically cleared, could accept the fetus based on their genetic qualities before the baby is born.

How much further along would we be in this, if we stopped trying to win an argument, and concentrated more on solving the problem? You're not going to get anywhere in trying to force your views--whatever they are, on someone who doesn't share them. It doesn't have to be either or... Devote your effort to the solution and not the continuing argument....