Divergence – you say that sentience is a necessary condition for personhood. So when do you regard sentience – consciousness or awareness - as occurring? Some, like Peter Singer, want personhood – based upon self-awareness - to be recognised some months after birth. Are you in that group?

Why should “personhood” – a notoriously slippery philosophical notion - be the benchmark for protection from destruction, anyway? Why isn’t being a part of the human family enough? Is it because new human life clearly commences at fertilisation and that wouldn’t leave any room for abortion?

After all, it is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – not the Universal Declaration of Personhood Rights – that countries, such as Australia, have signed up to

Certainly human life in its earliest months is not sentient but it does have the capacity to become sentient. That is the important distinction that needs to be made between a new human life and a human life that may clearly have lost all capacity, both now and for the future, for sentience. It is wrong to kill the former but it may be acceptable to turn off the life support for the latter (depending on how certain it is that all capacity for sentience has been irretrievably extinguished).

A woman who is pregnant through rape should have a choice. If she chooses to have an abortion perhaps that is God's plan.

If she chooses to have that baby that is her right.

If there is a God and he, she or it has a mind it is arrogance on the part of anyone to claim to read that mind.

Runner wrote: "Great story Rachael although 99% plus baby murders are more for convenience and as a result of brainwashing by people using junk science than the young girl being raped as was the case with your mother."

As usual, runner, you are confusing terms. A fetus is not a baby so abortion is not baby murder. However, I assume you are using emotive language to describe abortion. You also are probably are quite willing to lie to make a point. That really doesn't say much for your morality. However, I will assume you may be telling the truth, and you have found some statistic about the reason for 99%+ abortions are for a woman's convenience. Assuming there are statistics relating to your claim please cite the source. I would be interested if perhaps you have resorted to telling the truth.

I assume you are male and will never be pregnant. In my opinion not wanting to go through nine months of pregnancy and have an unwanted baby at the end of it is a perfectly reasonable reason to have an abortion.

I mention 8.7 billion people and the ape doesn't know how to save its self.....please continue:)

Kat

'A fetus is not a baby so abortion is not baby murder. '

as usual David f using junk science as justification for murder. Try looking through a powerful microscope and again you need to shut your eyes to reality. So convenient to redefine terms to hide atrocities. Just what the Nazis did when calling Jews sub human.

I'll be a little more constructive. Religious cults have only one thing in mind, and that's self preservation. They believe in going to the end while knowing god is coming to pick them all up.....what a load of bullsh@t!....Then you have David F the Jewish, that think they are the chosen ones....your indoctrination is why your all and everything is failing....I cant believe what Iam seeing all around the world......your relying on superstition to make your futures....Its true in diagnosis....Humans can barely go one step forwards, without going centuries back......and you call yourselves intelligent!......

KAT

KAT:(

Dear Divergence,

<<It is worth pointing out that not even all the early Christians accepted that ensoulment (personhood) begins at the moment of conception.>>

I prefer the term 'embodiment' because the soul is primary while the body without it is just a piece of meat. 'Ensoulment' suggests the opposite.

"Personhood" is when a one takes up a personae, i.e. plays a character in a play or novel. In that sense, it is almost synonymous with "embodiment".

I am surprised at the general assumption as if embodiment is a binary thing, such as one moment it isn't, the next it is - why can't it be gradual, intermittent or a matter of degree?