Aren't you a clump of cells too?

A little more advanced than that. I mean you wouldn't recognise them as even slightly human

Why not?

They have no traits resembling humans or advanced life

Interesting. What are these traits?

You know, the usual, body shape, organs, bones, intelligence, that kind of thing.

So...Someone with severe bodily deformities or mental disabilities is not human?

They usually have quite a few of those features, if not all. Point is, this thing technically isn't even alive yet. Not close. You cannot kill that which isn't alive.

Someone lacking bones, organs, intelligence, fully formed organ systems, and the ability to be viable on their own is not considered human. Before you misunderstand what I'm saying (as is common in threads like this), please notice I used the term "and", not "or".

All I'm trying to say is that we should not dismiss fetuses as inhuman so quickly. We may know how they develop, but we do not know the extent of their feeling or awareness. Abortion is so controversial because there are so many grey areas. It forces us to define what is human and what is not. As we know, that perception has lead to massive death and genocides in the past.

I can appreciate that point of view. However, there are a few things I would like to bring up here: 1) Neither you nor myself should try to dictate how a woman should live her life. If she feels abortion is the best, safest practice for her, she should be able to receive one, [i]without[/i] being attacked for her decision. 2) We are already facing insanely high populations around the world. Many children are being abandoned, sold into slavery, or dying from lack of resources. Is that any quality of life? If the parents knew they could not provide for this child, should they have been forced to have the child? Adoption is truly not a viable option, either, as we don't have enough demand for adopted children to balance the supply of children that would be put up for adoption. 3) Is it appropriate to force a woman to have the child of her rapist (sexual assailant, if this gets bleeped) or relative? Is that fair to the child? Is it fair to tell a woman that she has to birth the child, even if the pregnancy or birthing may put her life in danger? 4) If a woman knows her child will suffer if it is born due to illness (illnesses that can be tested for before birth), is it appropriate to force her to have the child anyway? Who will help her through the heartache of losing her child before its time? I'm not saying everyone should go around aborting fetuses like crazy. I'm just saying that there are many things that need to be considered in this discussion (and in the debate nationwide).

Being a woman myself, I possess an understanding of many of those points and agree with them. Like you, I just believe that abortion, if practiced at all, should be exercised with restraint.

Agreed. However, I believe that the people in charge of this restraint should be the women potentially getting abortions, and not the government.

Well when they lack functioning brains or nervous systems we know they can't really perceive anything.

That is when the spiritual aspect enters in. Part of what makes us human and different from animals is that we have a spirit or soul (at least for me). So when does the baby acquire a soul? I can't tell if you're the type to attack people with religious beliefs or not, but I decided to say my peace anyway.

What evidence is there for a soul? I think Descartes had decent ideas but even they don't quite hold up

What evidence is there against a soul? Spiritual aspects, as of yet, are incapable of being proven or disproved in the eyes of contemporary science.

The burden of proof is not on me. I don't see any reason why we should believe in a soul.

Then that is your choice.