If you claim that we are human when we have a developed brain, then who or what caused the brain to develop? Who or what caused the organs to develop? Who or what caused the molecules to divide?

The example about the car is a poor one. Why? Because you claim that a car is only a car when it’s assembled. In your definition, a human is only a human if it was born. Therefore, according to your definition, it makes perfect sense to kill a baby when it hasn’t been born because it does not fit your personal and relative definiton of “human.” The problem with this argument is it validates murder with word play. This is erronous reasoning because anyone can redefine a word and twist it to make it look good.

You can try to convince your self that since not all the parts have been assembled that it’s not a car. My response would be “What if all you had was a head and torso? Would that still make you human? What if all you had was a head and an artificial lung and heart? Would that still make you human? What if you had was limited brain function and no body parts? Would you still be human? What if you lost 99% of your brain? Would you still be human? What if you had all the working body parts and not a functioning brainwave? Would you still be human? Your argument is poor because you try to draw the line to where humanity begins from a physical perspective; while neglecting holistically that a human is the sum of all parts – body and soul. The burden of proof lies with you to try to prove that humanity doesn’t begin at birth. The truth is: life begins at conception and ends in death and to see otherwise is blind to the facts.

Can you honestly say that the human body stops developing at any point in life? It’s a fact that there’s no one in the world who can prevent their body from ever staying the same at any point in time. For you to claim that the body becomes human at birth is to be ignorant of this fact. You’re merely stating that to be human is to enter life when one exits the birth canal or some other artificial method. There’s no one who can suspend development at any point in life. That’s why there’s so many creams, pills, exercises, diets and medicines being invented to prevent the body from imminent death.

And… I do believe all living things have souls, just less evolved souls…

A fertilized egg developes under nine months untill the babies birht, and then from that the cells in the body degenerates, untill death.

It’s not different stages of life, it’s different stages towards life. If you stop building a car when you are halfway down and throws it away, would you have thrown away a car then? No.

An other thing is that it is activity in the brain that makes a human. Or something that is a counciousness. If you manage to construct a councious self aware computer it would be, maybe not a human, but a being, and pulling out the plug for ever would be killing it.

An embryo has no activity in the brain what so ever. After a coulpe a weeks, yes, but abortion isn’t legal after a couple of weeks.

Let me leave you with this. Would you be alive today if your mother and father’s sperm never united to form a zygote? Would you be alive today if for some reason your development was never allowed to progress? What makes you or the State so much better than a zygote, fetus or the unborn that you feel it’s your right or duty take it upon your self to decide who should live or who should die?

Life does not go through different stages, it developes gradually, and then ages, untill it dies.

If you look at what makes a human being, and then what makes a fetus, you will see that there’s a significant difference.

Abortion activists would like to believe that they are doing the public good by simply saying that it’s a woman’s right to terminate the “Inconvenience” of having a child. Because someone is not ready to have a child for some reason or another (including rape), makes it perfectly ok to kill another human being for sake of inconvenience. I’m sorry but I find it really really hard to see how any one can say they love trees any more than they can love a human being.

Any biologist can show you a diagram of the life-cycle of a human – from conception to death. If you really think about it, we enter life at all stages. There’s never a stage where we are always the same. You are not the same now as you were 10 yrs ago. Nor will you be the same now as you will be in 20 yrs. But your DNA remains the same. The same as it was when you were born. The same as it was when you were zygote (sperm and egg). A cell at conception is just another stage in life and to terminate your existence at any point in your life-cycle is an injustice and is murder. The bottom line is because it’s inconvenient for a woman or a state to have a child – then it’s perfectly ok to kill it. This is a grave injustice.

No matter voice or not doesn’t mean they could use it. They are merely a collection cells slowly resembling a human, but before 10 weeks they are none of that.

Prove me wrong and I shall convert.

If your reason for being is to simply exist and to die, then who are you (abortionist advocates) to decide that those cells should cease to exist? Maybe it’s small consolation to you, that because the unborn does not have a voice, that it makes it easier to kill them.

But i don’t subscribe t the idea that embryos are human beings. I believe them to be a collection of molecules with the potential of one ay become a human being. I belive that life evolves gradually and do not start with fertilization.

Abortionists and likeminded people argue that zygotes are NOT human and that they are simply a collection of cells. The fact is, you too my friend are a collection of cells! You’re just more complex! What makes you any more special than a few cells if you don’t have a soul?

Let us not forget that slavery advocates said the same thing about blacks. That they we’re sub-human. The same thing is being said about the unborn!