A fetus isnt a person,, so your argument is invalid.
If your argument against the moral personhood of a foetus is that it can't feel pain, then you can apply the same reasoning to conclude that human beings in comas and human beings with congenital analgesia also lack moral personhood.
Has ever had a human brain = a human Has never had a human brain = not a human
Jesus Christ. lmao
Your argument has changed now. Initially it was "able to feel pain", but now it is "has ever had a human brain".
Are you now talking about being human, or being a moral person? Because a foetus is unequivocally human, but what we're debating is whether or not a foetus qualifies as a moral person.
A corpse has had a human brain. Does that mean it is deserving of the same protections as a full-grown human? A corpse has less human functionality, present or future, than a foetus.
I didnt read your post, but you are making this way more complicated than it is.
It's a pretty short (and simple, I think) post, but if you don't want to respond to it then that's algood.
Your argument supporting abortion changed between posts, so I just asked some simple follow ups to clarify what you meant. ---
I live in a big house and it's handy to have a pair of running shoes so that it doesn't take me forever to get from one area of the house to another.