c
 



͚Life͛ is defined as the ability to breathe, grow, reproduce, etc. However, before a fetus is born, it had
none of these abilities, and depends on the mother to keep it breathing. Therefore, although biologically,
the ͚life͛ of a fetus begins at conception, a person does not have moral personhood until much later,
after he is born.

At conception, although biologically, the fetus was produced, but it is still unable to possess an
individual consciousness and it͛s unable to survive outside the womb. Therefore, at conception, a fetus
is not yet a human, but only a á

 human life. Renowned philosopher Professor Peter Singer
defined argued that something can only be a person if it is self-aware and has temporal awareness. A
fetus does not meet this definition until after it is born, so therefore, morally speaking, the life of a fetus
begins at birth.

Infanticide, the homicide of an infant, is illegal in most countries, although the charges vary from
infanticide to homicide and manslaughter. However, currently, abortions are legal in most countries,
even abortions that allow babies to be aborted at 30 weeks. This shows that the law recognizes the
human status of an infant, but not a fetus.

In religion, many religious academicians take the birth-view stance. This stance is supported by
quotations from the respective holy books; the Jewish Talmud holds that a fetus's life is less valuable
than a woman's; if the woman's life is endangered by the pregnancy, it requires an abortion. However, if
the "greater part" of the fetus has emerged, then its life may not be taken even to save the mother's,
 

 
  
 

therefore implying that a fetus
becomes a human life after it is bornSome Christian theologians hold that ensoulment occurs when an
infant takes its first breath of air. They cite, among other passages, Genesis 2:7, 
  
  


 



 


  



Also, although the   of the infant develops at birth, the  of the infant does not develop and
start functioning until much later, after the birth of the infant. Legally and biologically, the brain is the
representative of a human; a human is considered dead only if his brain is dead. Therefore, as the
fetus͛s brain isn͛t functioning until it is born, legally, the life of a human begins at birth.

A favored argument of the opposition is that life begins at conception. However, there are major flaws
in this argument. In human cloning, there is no conception at all. Then, could you say that a cloned
human is not a human? Conception isn͛t even a specific point in time; it is a period over which the sperm
meets the ovum, and not a specific time. Also, the life-begins-at-conception argument also ignores
parthenogenesis, when the gamete of a female is not fertilized by a male, yet produces viable and
unique offspring that are not clones. Only DNA from the mother is inherited, but it is not identical to her.
This had been done before; in 2004, Japanese researchers led by Tomohiro Kono succeeded after 457
attempts to merge the ova of two mice, the result of which developed normally into a mouse. Could you
then say that it͛s not a mouse?

In 2003, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was enacted in the United States, which prohibits an abortion
if 


 


   

  á
 
 

á





   

 Meaning that, after most of the baby is born, the baby will
be granted human status, and thus could not be aborted, as it would no longer be a 

, but a 
,
thus abortion would not be an abortion, but infanticide.

Therefore, I conclude that medically, philosophically and theologically, the life of a fetus begins only
after it͛s born, therefore, I support the motion that life begins at birth.