[mjh2539]

You were wrong (and were also being uncharitable). The reason why I phrased the definition the way I did was so that I did not preclude the possibility of killing someone who was not innocent. This includes every instance of lack of innocence, but minimally, instances of self-defense.

I found your talking about implicature patronizing.

I agree, we can't communicate with people who insist on Humpty Dumpty's rule; what you fail to recognize is that you're happy to use Humpty Dumpty's rule in regard to 'human'. You have to make recourse to odd language like 'clump of cells'. The human fetus is a human being; that is, it is a human, and it doesn't really matter that you don't want to admit what is obvious to biologists, OB/GYNs, couples trying to conceive, people in parts of the world that haven't been colonized by Westerners and their ideologies, etc.