Did you know: until the early 80s, the religious position was that life began at birth, and specifically with the newborn's first (unaided) breath.

It wasn't until the Right realized that the sexual revolution wasn't just a phase and needed a new way to limit the sexual agency and freedom of people who weren't cis men that the current "life begins at conception" rhetoric settled in.

@Shamar @noelle
Well, life begins, but is it a life of a person?

We don't call it a murder, when you kill a chicken, or a worm. We only call it a murder when you kill another person.

So, is an embryo already a person? or is it just an animal?

@Shamar @noelle dunno, maybe being unable to pass a turing test?
What makes it more of a person than a fly?

@Shamar @noelle
Would that mean that:
- if another species was equally intelligent to humans, but its DNA was very different from that of a human, it wouldn't be a person?
- if a non-biological creature, eg. an electronic one, was as intelligent as humans, it wouldn't be a person?
- if you uploaded your mind to a computer, the copy of your mind wouldn't be a person?

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
The ugly truth is that a human can indeed become something that is no longer truly a person.
The even uglier is that a fetus can have genetic defects that would just cause them and/or others suffering. If you can detect these defects soon after conception then it is acceptable to choose not to bring such a child into the world.
1/2

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle I believe this views are based on the fact that humans are very expensive to produce. It takes ~20 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to grow a self-sustaining and contributing individual in western countries. I suppose this could change some day, if we could create or copy human beings at will. This would also make murder less of a crime and more like a minor inconvenience.