>>550
"So far we have been talking about when a fetus becomes a human being. The only thing mentioned thus far is a conscious."
No, there were many other things mentioned, one of which (feeling) I can mention off the top of my head. A fetus is genetically 'human.' It has the organs of a human. Once it has certain properties such as consciousness/senses, it deserves legal protection.
"One might argue that a fetus is not a person until higher level brain functions present. Only when higher level brain functions are present does one have the ability to form language and perform logical deductions."
This is redundant. When the fetus is conscious/has senses, it deserves legal protection.
"It is the presence of higher level brain functions that makes a human being a person."
Your opinion. This is *not* fact.
"Because higher level brain functions are not present in a fetus in the first and second trimester of pregnancy, it is not morally wrong to terminate the pregnancy during that period."
Again, it is genetically human. If it has consciousness or senses, it deserves legal protection.
"The latter position, that a fetus is not a person until there are higher brain functions, is the correct position."
Your belief. This is not factually supported.
"Consciousness is a quality that is undeniably a component of personhood."
One of them. Thus, we can conclude that fetuses that have attained some degree of consciousness should not be aborted. This is wrong.
"From what I read, consciousness doesn't develop until the seventh month in pregnancy when the cerebrum starts developing, so some argue that it is morally wrong to terminate pregnancy at that time."
If consciousness develops at that time, then that is when no more should be allowed, clearly.
"But that time is only when it starts developing, there's still a window of problems that may occur, such as the possibility of the cerebrum malforming or not forming at all, or the cerebrum may develop a disorder and render the fetus at birth a vegetable or make it still born. The brain is still undeveloped even after birth."
What a load of bullshit. Yeah, people's minds don't develop until quite a while after birth, this doesn't give you the freedom to kill them.
"Only after birth does the fetus then immediately transfer to pulminary circulation and its ductus arteriosus withers away, and it becomes a human being. So aborting it wouldn't be morally wrong in this factor."
Redundant. Abortion should obviously no longer be allowed once the fetus has attained consciousness, and senses.
"Only after birth does the lungs activate and the fetus breathes its first 'breath of life' of air from the outside, and the heart starts pumping blood to the lungs."
Abortion should no longer be allowed once the fetus has attained consciousness/senses.
"These factors make the fetus a human being only after birth."
No they don't. It is genetically human, and once it has attained consciousness/senses, abortion should no longer be allowed.