Hey, YOU provided sources that you cannot even back up. Of course now you want ME to provide proof because you can't prove that a fetus is not a human. I asked you to prove that the law shows that a fetus isn't a human. If it's actually true, you would be able to do it. Opinions don't count. What I know, the law says it's not a PERSON. Human being is our species. A fetus is of our species. It is a stage of development. It is not a body part or organ. That is a fact.

however human/person can be interchangeable. therefore, when asking on either side no one has proof of either way. there is no need to be callous though. you are wrong, i was wrong and i admit it.

and i never said it wasnt human
i said it wasnt a human being

No human is a species, "being" is irrelevant...you dont call dogs "canine beings" do you? "Being" in itself can fit a broad spectrum of "ideals" or phrases, etc. Human can only be one thing and that is homosapiens. Person is also in itself too broad a word...it can be used in many ways as well. Therefore, it too, is irrelevant.

Human and person CAN be interchangeable but not always.

But, you use the term human as an adjective. Not as a noun. It's like saying human heart, human hand, etc. It's a human fetus, but a fetus is a stage of development, so it's like saying human infant, human adult, etc. It's not a body organ or body part like a limb. So, how can it be a human fetus (unborn young), but not A human?

You obviously think that a fetus being "human" or not makes a difference as to whether abortion is allowable. But why does it make a difference? What is the essential reason, to you, that the zygote/embryo/fetus being "human" means that a woman should not be allowed to abort it? I am not being snarky here -- I really need to understand your way of thinking on this.

Why does that matter? And first you ask why we cannot call it by its proper name...a fetus. Then you ask when is it not human. And now you are saying that we are calling it a human fetus to describe it. But that is what it is. It is not a human being, but it is human. And no its not like saying human heart, because that is not a developmental stage. And I have blatantly said that it IS a human. Just not a HUMAN BEING. I even left fetus out. Reread before you play word games.

Yes, it's a human fetus, but you kept saying it wasn't A human. You were calling it human in the adjective sense. It is like saying human heart. You are describing a word which in this case is fetus. For people like you who do not believe it is A human, you are implying that the fetus is just a "thing" made up of human cells, not an actual human in the fetal stage of life.

Now you say it is A human (at the end of your post), but how in the world can a fetus be A human but not a human being? Aren't they the same thing?

Abortion is more than just ending a pregnancy, or getting rid of cells. It kills a human in a certain stage of life. But, don't assume I'm extreme in my views. I've met certain pro-choicers who believed it was a human but they still supported abortion as a choice because they believe a human should have a right to stop another human-born OR unborn-from using their body against their will even if it means ending its life. I seriously believe this is the ONLY good argument from the pro-choice side. There's just no need to try to dehumanize the unborn, or to compare the unborn to cancer, parasites, etc.

At what point does that non-being become a being, and what in the definition of "being" establishes that thresh-hold? Therefore to say, ". . . by all the empirical evidence, an embryo is clearly a human being," is (if you'll pardon me using your phrase) "playing linguistic games", because the phrase "human being" is itself not defined in empirical terms.
That conclusion is incorrect - it is empirically defined.
-If you have a source that defines a human being in empirically measurable terms, I would be glad to consider it. This is not quibbling: if it is your intent to accuse others of the crime of homicide, then it is your responsibility to establish that a homicide has in fact occurred. To do that, you must first establish that the subject is more than human tissue, that it is in fact a person - which in turn requires that we define precisely what a "person" or "human being" is
And of course depending on the definition you put on "empirically measurable" such definitions exist - in most legal jurisdictions on earth. Furthermore since the legal definition is the codification of the social consensus, and since there is universal social consensus on the meaning of the word phrase, there are certainly empirical standards for measurement.
http://eileen.undonet.com/Main/KreeftBeckw ith/WhatIsAHumanBeing.html

The thruth is that we the people in the world don't like abortion (like Obama said hehe) and emphasis on trying to justify abortion based on linguistics doesn't make us to like abortion any better. I think what should be admitted by prochoice is that yes abortion is a terrible thing and what can we do to lower this rates.

lol! I am going to just repeat this as an answer to every insane pro-lifer I come across!!!

Here's my answer:

well i very well cannot call it a monkey fetus now can i?

Of course not. A monkey is monkey a fetus is development stage of a human.

That is incorrect. A fetus is a development stage of other animals. There is a monkey (although to be equivalent you would need to specify what type of monkey!) fetus, or a human fetus or a goat fetus.

Okay fetus is development stage of other animals so?? What is that you are saying that human = monkey?

Well then, why can I not call a human fetus a human fetus? You say its because I am using it as an adjective. But I cannot just call it a z/e/f either, or a mass of tissues, or anything else. Everything I call it is wrong. I give up.

Grow up. What, none of you are capable explaining why some pro-choicers just have to dehumanize the unborn when there's no need for it?


*sigh* And I wish people would just stop assuming that all pro-lifers are Christian or Republican which the quote you used implied ("godly", "Jesus", "Palin family")