The Abortion Question

[Brownshoe]

(10-02-2015, 11:34 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You argued death occurs when there isn't a pulse and brain activity so individualism should begin when a pulse and brain activity occur.

I see two problems with your argument:

1. When someone dies they are still an individual. So why should we use the opposite criteria for death to establish individualism?  

2. I have explained the criteria you are using for death isn't always true.

1. You never stop being an individual, so you use the opposite criteria for death to establish individualism, because at that point it meets all the qualifications to becoming an individual living human. Why would you say something is an individual at the point we can prevent it's death? We know it's alive, and we know that it's not a part of the mother, because after conception it attaches to the mother. So that obviously shows that it's a separate entity.

2. When is someone alive, but doesn't have a heartbeat and brain activity?