The purpose of government is to protect the rights of the individual. Therefore the question of when "a fetus becomes a human" is of critical importance to its most basic function. In protecting rights, the government has every right to interfere.

Maybe I should clarify, there are actual rules to biological life, here they are:

The first calculates an organism being 'alive':

The "ability to reproduce", or to make copies of itself, whether reproduction or cellular growth.

The second constitutes 'life':

It must "acquire particular molecules and use them in controlled chemical reactions that maintain conditions suitable for life and that contribute growth."
(- Scott Freeman)

A young being, outside the womb, has the ability to 'maintain conditions satiable for life', but when inside the womb does not, it works in conjunction (actually it works against the host) to grow. However, if the organism is able to survive once outside the womb, even if taken out by force, it is a form of life.

Here is another example: A seed has the capability to grow by itself, but is not considered a plant even in very early stages of growth; it must be rooted in order to distinguish it as a life form. The same with the human fetus, it is indistinguishable from other animals at an early stage.

__________________
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread." - Alexander Pope

I have been saying for a long time that the baby is independant from it's birth mother, and can survive without her help. I have said this all along, have I not?

__________________
Sharon Marie Tate: January 24 1943 - 9 August 1969
Forever Remembered

A seed is not a good eg. for one reason a seed is not of biological life. It is not made up in the same way of animals, and people. Plus a seed is not yet living until planted and fertilised by water and the earth. In the same way an egg in the womans womb is not yet life until fertilised. However when fertilised both these things are living.

[[/quote]

If I was a prisoner on death row and decided to kill every prison guard and escape, and had the capability of doing it, would you think it alright in commiting this act. After all I would be doing this in the pursuit of life happiness and leberty.

Regardless of many say you say it a baby is till not independant, inside or outside the womb. If your excuse to kill a baby inside the womb is because it is dependant on you, then a mother should be also allowed to kill their 1 month old baby because it too is dependant on them. This not rational reasoning it is just another excuse.

Non-sequitur alert!!!!

That makes no sense whatsoever. Most reasonable people acknowledge that prisoners have forfeited these rights by virtue of transgressing upon the same rights of another (ie. committed their crime).

Its the same argument that used to be applied to domestic abuse cases. I can beat the crap out of my wife and not be arrested. But you lay a hand on her and you can be arrested. Its all about ownership. If I take my 67 Olds 442 and burn a dohnut in your yard, you can arrest me for destorying private property. However if I do a brodie in my own yard, they can't do spit.

It's wrong, but that's the mentality.

We can only defeat this when there is a universal definition of "alive" and "human".

__________________
"I know no method to secure the repeal of bad or obnoxious laws so effective as their stringent execution." March 4, 1869, Grant's First Inaugural Address

The example of the seed was a general one. It wasn't to be taken as a literal comparison of the two. But the fertilised egg is not a form of life, it is simply 'alive'.

__________________
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread." - Alexander Pope

ooooh, rocket power!...do post pics (under the community section if you have any)

Anyway, back to the thread...

__________________
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread." - Alexander Pope