Is the War on Women Real or Manufactured?

I didn't see your original post. I'll look for it after I submit this comment.

Regarding your comment that those who think a zygote is a human shouldn't let their belief impact others, that doesn't rest well with logic. The question would be whether a zygote truly is human or not. If it truly is human, then you are dealing with a life or death situation, not just a medical procedure based on choice. In that case, it becomes a case of legalized murder of an innocent human. Taking that line of thinking to it's logical end, one could justify nearly any behavior towards someone they do not recognize as human. The racial zealots who want to exterminate entire races could claim that they feel the race in question is not human, and those who feel different have no right to impose their beliefs on them. You and I would both agree that argument would hold no water with anyone who is remotely sane. And please don't get me wrong, I'm not comparing those who are pro choice with being like Hitler and the Nazis. I'm simply illustrating where the line of reasoning goes.

That being said, then the question truly becomes, is the zygote/embryo/fetus a person or not? If the answer is "a person", then one cannot simply stand by while that person is brutally killed. It would be like standing in your front yard watching a person brutally attacking your next door neighbor. In that situation, you would be compelled to help the neighbor. Nobody would argue that the attacker's freedom of choice to attack or not to attack shouldn't be violated.

Anyway, I'm getting pretty long winded here, so I'll cut it off at that. I appreciate your reply, and look forward to your response. Thanks.

Thanks for your reply. It is refreshing to have a discussion rather than an argument. It's interesting that we have several points of agreement, even though we come down on opposite sides of the beginning of personhood for a fetus.

Regarding the death penalty, I don't think there is necessarily an inconsistency between being pro life and still support the death penalty. The reasoning actually hinges on the same logic I mentioned above. Assuming the embryo is human, and should be protected, then abortion would be killing an innocent person. On the other hand, a convicted criminal (murderer) is not an innocent human being. Thus, the question becomes "has one done something worthy of death?". In the case of a murderer, to simplify the argument, you could say that since he had taken a life, his is now forfiet. The same could not be said of the fetus. An unborn child has not performed any act which could be remotely considered worthy of death.

In this case, the non-contradiction hinges on the innocence of the unborn compared to the guilt of the known, convicted murderer.

In my statements above, I "assumed" the right of the government to issue the death penalty. I do think that could be established, but my point was to show (hopefully) that there isn't necessarily a contradiction between holding a pro life position and supporting the death penalty.

I appreciate your thoughts on my reasoning here. Especially if you think there are any holes in my logic.