These are questions that abortion supporters don’t like to answer.
While the pro-life movement believes that life begins at conception (and science backs that up), the pro-abortion movement often sets the arbitrary standard of "viability." Such a standard is indeed arbitrary because "viability" not only changes where technology changes, but it can vary from person to person.
The "viability" argument is linked to the next question. If a fetus is less human because it is dependent on another for survival, there are numerous children and adults who are also less human. Infants and young children depend on their parents or guardians to feed them, clothe them, and keep them safe. Those with moderate to severe physical and mental disabilities depend on caretakers, doctors, and sometimes machines to survive. Those in a coma also survive only with the help of others.
Further, if development dictates humanity, if a fetus is less human because it is less developed physically and mentally than an infant, a toddler, a teenager, or an adult, where does the right to terminate end? Does a 35-year-old have the right to call for the termination of a teenager because the teenager is not as far along in their life cycle? Is the 35-year-old justified in calling a teenager "less human," and therefore of less value to the species? It may seem farcical, yet that’s what’s being said of the pre-born.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47400/camp-how-progressives-use-logical-fallacies-change-frank-camp
While the pro-life movement believes that life begins at conception (and science backs that up), the pro-abortion movement often sets the arbitrary standard of "viability." Such a standard is indeed arbitrary because "viability" not only changes where technology changes, but it can vary from person to person.
The "viability" argument is linked to the next question. If a fetus is less human because it is dependent on another for survival, there are numerous children and adults who are also less human. Infants and young children depend on their parents or guardians to feed them, clothe them, and keep them safe. Those with moderate to severe physical and mental disabilities depend on caretakers, doctors, and sometimes machines to survive. Those in a coma also survive only with the help of others.
Further, if development dictates humanity, if a fetus is less human because it is less developed physically and mentally than an infant, a toddler, a teenager, or an adult, where does the right to terminate end? Does a 35-year-old have the right to call for the termination of a teenager because the teenager is not as far along in their life cycle? Is the 35-year-old justified in calling a teenager "less human," and therefore of less value to the species? It may seem farcical, yet that’s what’s being said of the pre-born.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47400/camp-how-progressives-use-logical-fallacies-change-frank-camp
