[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
The first, central, and indispensable issue regarding abortion is whether the fetus is a person.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, if the fetus is a person, then the woman's "choice" is restricted in the same way it would be were she considering the killing of any other person:

[/ QUOTE ]

Kip, it sounds like you're more familiar with this type of debate. Above is how the guy starts his claim. I expected to hear an argument for the fetus being a person. But what little argument he lays out is for it being a potential person. Am I missing something subtle?

I must say, I almost preferred DS's "everybody knows" and "OF COURSE IT IS" line of reasoning to this fellas -
a) it's not insane. ( the baseline sanity test).
b) I can't think of anything else. ( the GAP argument)
c) some claim equating a 1 week fetus sentience to his unconscious sentience ( I'm going to offer to arrange the switch for him). Leaving aside how he knows that, it seems strange to even make the 'potential person' argument by comparison to the one time we don't consider a normal person guilty for their actions because they aren't really there. Odd. ( I have other objections, but I wanted to see if my lack of familiarity caused me to overlook a reference that mattered) Is this the best of these type of claims you have came across. I was disappointed.

luckyme