I don't expect an abortion opponent to drop out of the debate. They don't however have the right to impose their (primarily religious) beliefs on those that don't hold them and can't expect me to take them seriously.
Slavery has no bearing on the argument at hand, nor are those arguments tangentially relevant.
The reason birthpoint is used as the brightline between person and not-person (which is probably the more accurate question) is because as humans we specifically confer personhood based on movement through time (the question you raised was time, not space-based). We celebrate birthdays, we have bar and bat mitzvahs, we have communion, we have puberty, we have the age of majority--all timepoints that society (especially the law) recognizes that the celebrant is more of a person (more self-aware, better able to self-determine) than they were prior to that timepoint. So yes, passing a point in time does indeed confer personhood (barring individual barriers such as retardation, senility, etc.).
If you can show that skinning 20 live cats a day is directly related to your survival, that you have the right to survive, that you can procure for yourself 20 cats per day, and you have the stomach to do it, skin away. |
