"I never said there was a major difference, except for the fact that the baby has now been born"
Do you think being born makes you a person?
"There are many differences. One minute before birth and one minute after birth, it's pretty much the same thing. One minute before birth and one minute after conception, it's not even close to the same thing."
Yes know; that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying one minute after conception isn't much different than 2 minutes after conception. 2 mins after conception isn't much different from 3 mins after conception. Follow that same pattern all the way until birth and there will be no time where a tremendous change has occurred.
"Where does the Bible say it's objectively wrong? And if it is objectively wrong, then that means God was wrong when he killed kids."
There's more to Christian teaching than the literal words of the Bible. If the Bible was a rule book, the rules would be bullet pointed or something. As it is, that's not the case, and when Jesus came to earth, He didn't even give us the Bible or tell us to follow it. It was written by people, and it contains many good lessons, rules, history lessons, etc., but Jesus founded a Church on Peter before He left. He gave that Church authority, and that Church which He founded says it's objectively wrong.
"The Bible has, and the Bible forms the basis for your religion."
Who has the Bible dehumanized? Actually the basis for my religion is Jesus, Peter and the other apostles, and the Church Jesus founded in their presence. The Bible came after that.
Wow okay. That's a pretty dangerous slippery slope. Don't be too upset if anyone ever tries to kill you because they have decided for themselves that you're not valuable.
"No, because that's illegal."
Do you base all your beliefs on laws? And why should we follow laws anyway if they prevent us from eliminating what we believe to have no value?
"You can place whatever value you want on anything, but that doesn't mean you get to do whatever you want to it."
So.....you can believe that unborn children are worthless, but that doesn't mean you get to kill them then, right? If this is how things are, it has to go both ways.
"Without their consent? Generally speaking, no. But there are circumstances where a person can't give consent either way, so the decision is left up to the family or spouse."
Exactly. So why should you be able to kill an unborn child without their consent? And besides, children developing in the womb are not like old people who are dying; they're young and growing. Snuffing out their brand new life could even be considered worse than family pulling the plug on someone so close to death they can't give consent.
"So if somebody has a terminal illness that they will never recover from, you think they should be forced to remain alive in excruciating agony?"
Short answer, yes. I don't see the huge problem with valuing human life. On the flip side, do you think suicide is okay or a good thing? Do you think homicide is okay or a good thing? Because if the answer to either is no, I'm not sure why you'd be okay with something in between.
"That's exactly the point I'm making. You don't seem to see any difference at all between them."
Of course there's a difference in size and development. But my point is that from day to day, there is no one day where it becomes instantly so much more developed than the day before. Therefore, the only logical conclusion to draw is that life begins at conception. I hope you won't deny that very basic scientific fact. On the other hand, if you don't believe that all human life has value, I can't contradict that with science, only hope and pray that you'll change your mind and come to know the truth.
Okay cool, so when do you think life and value begin then?
"Embryos lack personhood."
What is personhood? Nothing more than a term given to people by people that value them. So you've chosen to devalue them simply because you've chosen not to apply a term to them?
"7 cells isn't a body. Where is the skin? Bones? Flesh? Organs? Is a fingernail clipping a body? It has more than 7 cells."
Doesn't need that to be alive, growing, and valuable. No, fingernails are dead cells. An unborn baby is not dead, that is until an abortionist kills it.
"Why do you make up these bizarre arguments that aren't even close to what I'm saying? I never said anything like that. I'm saying that a literal clump of cells shortly after conception is not comparable to a fully grown adult, and you're over here talking about a midget genocide."
I make them up to show you what you're doing, but to a lesser degree. Obviously you don't think I should be able to kill small people, good. I don't either. But then you turn around and say unborn babies aren't valuable because they're just a clump of cells. How many cells need to be in the clump before it has value to you?
"Ask 100 people to show you a photograph of a child. How many do you think would show you a zygote? Honestly."
100 people's opinion doesn't change the fact of the definition. Do you base all your beliefs on what the majority thinks?
"I never said killing children was okay"
Yes I know you haven't said it explicitly, but you're okay with abortion, and I've proven time and time again that unborn babies are children by definition, so therefore, you have demonstrated to me that you're okay with killing children.
"Not to you, maybe. To other people, that is part of what determines value."
Oh so each person gets to decide for themselves who is valuable and who isn't? So if I decide you're not valuable, I should be able to kill you?
"You do realize some people have living wills for that very reason, right? They choose to be taken off life support in certain situations."
I'm not talking about that. I'm asking if you think other family members should be able to decide to kill them without their consent. I'm not implying that consent makes killing someone okay though; I believe euthanasia is wrong too.
"A fertilized egg compared to a newborn isn't a "slight variation"."
You're skipping a lot of days in between. A fertilized egg doesn't go poof and instantly become a newborn child. It slowly develops. There is no point during pregnancy where there is a change so distinct and important that the child has no value one moment and tons the next, except conception, where a unique set of DNA has been formed.
"Show me a screenshot where I said anything about having a sense of identity or ability to speak."
I don't have that, but I don't need it. If a lack of a sense of identity or ability to speak isn't why you dehumanize the unborn, what is it then? What is so different from the moment before birth and the moment after? What is so different about the moment before the moment before birth etc. all the way back to conception? Nothing, until conception.
"And if you're a Christian, you really have no grounds to accuse someone else of dehumanizing people."
You always have to bring Christianity into things, don't you. Once again, you do realize I don't need to be Christian to realize that killing children is objectively wrong, right? I've never dehumanized anyone, so I'm not sure why I have no grounds.
"That's not a body. A cell is not a body. Do you think a single brick is a house?"
It's about 7 cells, which make up a very tiny undeveloped body. Obviously a single brick isn't a house, but that's a dangerous way of arguing. Should I be able to dehumanize someone simply because they have less cells than me? Should I be able to start a genocide of short people?
"The word "child" clearly refers to someone who has been born. A zygote is not a child."
This is about the fourth time I've had to correct you in that the definition of child does not specify born or unborn, or even person for that matter. It is simply a human under the age of puberty. If that doesn't sit well with you that you support the killing of children, good, it shouldn't, because killing children isn't okay. I think we can both agree on that. I'd appreciate if you'd stop trying to change the definitions of words to suit your agenda