Originally Posted by mcan
Academically, yes this is probably the case. Philosophers have gone round and round with the definition of "human being" for generations. The fact is, there probably isn't an "objective" truth to this. Just like there isn't an objective truth to the "what makes it art" debate. In the end, you have to just give these things the eye test and go with your gut. But there are arguments that can be convincing. All the arguments that I've heard for infanticide seem horrible to me, so I don't believe in infanticide. All the arguments that I've heard for abortion in the 3rd trimester (right to choose at any time, etc...) seem really bad to me. So I don't believe in abortion after the pregnancy has developed into a viable human being. But the arguments that I've heard for early termination seem reasonable, and the people who argue that a fetus is a human being seem to have all of their work in front of them. If you showed me a fetus in a jar, you'd really have a hard time coming up with some kind of definition of "human being" which included that thing. Looks like parts to me.
You can't really make the determination of when you are a "human being", you see you never were at risk of being terminated by the choice of your mother.