That's akin to saying that when seniors, or men or young adults or anyone for that matter enters into a vegetative state, becomes senile, or when their mind ceases to function to a "human" degree that the government has the right to kill these people

Another difference here is with a person in a vegetative state there was previous consciousness over a period of time thus constituting personhood. Where as with a fetus there was not.

His link and source to that is wikipedia. That wikipedia pages source and link is another wikipedia page.

I don't really credit that as a reliable source.

Perhaps you should consider checking the source citation before dismissing it.

Annas, George J.; Elias, Sherman (2007). "24. Pregnancy loss". In Gabbe, Steven G.; Niebyl, Jennifer R.; Simpson, Joe Leigh. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies (5 ed.). Churchill Livingstone. ISBN 978-0-443-06930-7.

The difference is that the fetus is alive, and the sky scraper parts aren't alive. It isn't as though the fetus were cut up into a 1000 different pieces and it was completely dead.

I can remove cells from my body that are just as alive as that fetus, but we wouldn't call those cells a human. Just because it's living human cells doesn't mean it's yet become a human.

Saying they're still humans because they had previously developed into human beings is like saying a human skeleton is a human, because it had (but no longer has) developed human emotions. This is a flawed thought.

The human skeleton was just one part of a human. Not a human in and of itself. It might be more akin to calling an intact corpse a human. Of course here we are subtracting the living aspect, thus making it a former human.

When the chances of a successful pregnancy are 9/10 at the highest, or 75% at the lowest, I'd say that is still a pretty large chance of the fetus turning into a human,

It's a high-ish chance, yes. It's not certain though by any means that, once pregnant, that fetus will be born eventually. Especially if you take into account stupid arguments like "condoms can fail!" in contraception debates, and their lowest number is higher than that.

where the differences are to large, and the similarities to small?

In the terms of the point I was making, the differences were minute. Yes, a building isn't living. Yes, a fetus isn't composed of distinct separate parts. That's not the point of the analogy.

I'll rephrase this and ask my question again: "do you think it would be RIGHT to kill a veggie who is brain dead because no one likes him or her and they're a small nuisance (on the grand scale of things) to society?

No, not for those reasons alone.

Ah, so you consider a human skeleton a human and a person?

No, I consider it to be something which -was- a -part- of a human.

You would walk up to a human skeleton and say "what's up?"

I wouldn't, but what do you call visits to the grave?

You consider anything that was a human and developed a connection with people humans?

Did I ever say this? No, so please, stop trying to put words in my mouth.

you should consider a fetus a person.

I consider it a possible person to be. This isn't the same as saying it's not a person at all, or has no rights.

I don't think that to be a person you must have had, had connections or relationships with other humans.

I don't think that either. This is just one difference between a fully developed person and a fetus.

For the sake of clarity...

I do not advocate abortion as something to be considered easily, nor do I advocate it on any one reason. My reasons for saying that it should be legal are numerous, some of which alone would not be sufficient.

i feel like a woman has a right to do whatever she wants to do with her body, the baby cant feel it and has no idea what is happening

I believe in life at conception, if you messed up deal with it and don't kill babies

I believe in life at conception, if you messed up deal with it and don't kill babies

It's not always the girls fault if she gets pregnant. It's wrong to be careless and get an abortion because of your mistake. But that's not always the case in pregnancy.

I believe in life at conception, if you messed up deal with it and don't kill babies

Yep..you hear that ladies? If you get r@ped, it is your fault for messing up..so deal with it

I hope you get my point here..

I personally think it depends on the reason you are getting abortion.
1)Is it to just get rid of the baby just cuz.
2)do you have a legit reason to get it.

1)Is it to just get rid of the baby just cuz.

"just cuz" isn't a reason. It's a blanket statement for when people are too lazy or not desiring to specify their actual reasons.

2)do you have a legit reason to get it.

This is where perhaps 70% of the abortion debate comes into play, after you separate out those completely against it and pro-choice viewpoints. What is accepted as "a legit reason" varies depending on who you ask.

No i am completely against abortion. I myself being an adopted child am very glad my birth mother didn't choose abortion. It makes you really appreciate life when its put in a view point as such

I myself being an adopted child am very glad my birth mother didn't choose abortion.

But that's the thing, isn't it? Choose. Just because it's legal doesn't mean everyone is going to do it. It's there for when it's needed.