[nateb2022]

I agree with this.

But I would add, I don't think we can define a person as anything other than a genetically distinct individual of the species Homo sapiens. If a definition were to be proposed not on the basis of what something is, but rather how it functions, where it exists, or its level of dependence on other persons, then personhood ceases to be an inherent property and becomes a conditional privilege. And historically, whenever society has tried to separate biological human status from legal 'personhood,' it has paved the way for dehumanization and injustice.

To preserve human equality, personhood must be tied strictly to objective biological reality.

[pstuart]

> genetically distinct individual of the species Homo sapiens

Well yes, in principle. But is a Blastocyst a person or potential person?

> paved the way for dehumanization and injustice

Oh, that ship sailed a long time ago and it has nothing to do with babies.

> objective biological reality

objective is an interesting word, in that in this topic it seems to be very subjective.

My point stands: the easiest way to prevent abortions from happening is to prevent unwanted pregnancies.