re: #152 Obdicut

Did I say that one couldn’t imagine the child, project into the future, want it, care for it? No.

Did I say that you said that? No.

You seem to be intentionally missing the point.

You seem to not have had much of one to begin with.

That isn’t a counter-example. That is an example of a religion that sees miscarriage as having a ‘soul’, and it’s intended to appease, comfort, or deal with that soul— it doesn’t treat it as though it was a person.

Having a soul is pretty much the definition of personhood in all cultures that are not secular.

We do not treat a pregnancy as though is a live birth because a pregnancy is, medically, statistically, and in every other way, not a live birth.

That’s a great tautology that you are stating there but I don’t think it was ever the point in any serious argument on the issue and thus just a little besides the point. Also, it was not at all the argument you were making (yours was concerned with the status of the “object” of the expecting woman — unborn vs born child — and not about the status of the expecting woman herself — pregnancy vs live birth).