Yeah, I saw the context after I replied. The post didn't have the full context right in front of my face and I'm lazy.

Yet still, I don't think that that is relevant to the discussion either. The fish's metaphysical existence is not being examined at all here, is it? Perhaps I am still missing the context. Anyway, your choice of definitions and frameworks is irrelevant, as with most people on the abortion debate. My position as regards the proper laws on abortion is agnostic on when a human life begins and when we need to protect it from harm. A person's right to theor own body and capability to make their own judgements is all but inviolable. The mother is in the best position to make decisions regarding her body and her child. Ergo, pro choice. Simple.

Everything else is noise, including your arguments. You are never going to convince someone who holds fetus life sacred to change theor mind on that one thing. I happen to hokd it sacred too. I am pro choice for the simple reason that arbitrary laws do more harm in this area than they help 99.99% of the time.