Still harping on the same nonsense and fallacy even though you have been refuted 6 ways to Sunday. Just because a bunch of religious right politicians manage to get into power and make a law based on religious belief does not make the tenets of that law " True" and it is fallacy to suggest otherwise (Appeal to Authority). The fact remains that you have no valid argument that shows that a zygote is a human/Homo sapiens. Aside from the fact that this claim has been refuted six ways to Sunday And your support for this naked claim is ?
Sure it does. At the zygote stage (a single human cell) no brain cells exist. In later stages, even when the brain has partially formed, without significant brain function (which happens around 22-26 weeks) - there is no mind.
Honesty in this debate has never been the anti aborts strong suit. Fallacy, semantics and ignorance their main weapons. Standing on a soapbox repeating your premise over and over " Its a homicide .. its a homicide" is not an argument for much. Then you have the similarly fallacious " its a baby because it's a baby". You really need to get some better material.
I agree and that was my point. I do not consider pregnancy to be part of childhood. Childhood starts at birth (some don't even include infancy in childhood, but I was in my statement).
LOL, actually the opposite is true. A child in utero is a person and a human being, abortion is a homicide. these are truths the abortion promoters refuse to admit to.
A Zygote is a fertilized egg which creates a cell. That cell is a living thing. If a man and a woman create this cell, wouldn't it be a living Thing?
As expected you respond with fallacy. The debate is about whether or not it is a child/human being. Repeating your premise over and over (its a baby, its a child in utero, its a human being) does not make your claim true. If you have not that a zygote is a child (and you have not) then stating "its a child in utero" is an assumed premise fallacy. Just another way of repeating one's premise. Do you have any non fallacious argument that shows your claim "its a child" is true ? Why should we consider a single human cell (at conception) to be a child ?
As expected you respond with nonsense. Legally a child in utero at any stage of development is a human being. It is literally stated as such in the UVVA! SO you can drone on and on (and I am sure you will) but you are and will always remain wrong!
Only if it results in someone being killed. - - - Updated - - - Doesn't matter. Arbitrary thresholds for protection are meaningless. - - - Updated - - - Actually hasn't been refuted at all. - - - Updated - - - Murder is just a homicide that is illegal. - - - Updated - - - Murder is just a homicide that is illegal.
Not sure what point you are trying to make. Sperm is a living thing, Egg is a living thing, Zygote is a living thing. Perhaps someone tell you otherwise ? but, it sure was not me.
I already dealt with this silly fallacy "Appeal to Authority". Just because some group of religious right zealots get's together and makes a law based on religious belief ... does not magically turn the verbiage of that into something that represents the truth or reality. Bad men and idiots have made all kinds of bad laws over the centuries. When a law is changed does the Truth suddenly change ? Did the law stating that Jews are sub-human some how turn a Jew into something less than human ? Do you have any material other than fallacy ?
What on earth are you talking about ? What arbitrary threshold are you referring to. ... and why are they arbitrary ? An argument consists of 2 things 1) A premise or Claim 2) evidence, rational, explanation why that claim is true. What rational or explanation for why you think your claim (the zygote is a human ) is true, has not been refuted ?