[More Cowbell]

Roe v. Wade addressed the whole trimester debate. Your position is consistent and well argued. However, if one does not directly equate a fertilized egg with a "child," then your absolutism ("Do you think "a" or not "a" That's all") does not apply. Within your thought system, it does apply.

Then your argument is not whether unborn babies have the right to live, it's that they only gain that right after a certain point. I will grant that I do understand your argument, even though I disagree with it.

The problem with an arbitrary cutoff point is that there are too many variables. How do we know exactly how far along a pregnancy is? Even the best prenatal ultrasounds only give an estimate of the gestational age. You're still saying that at some time during the pregnancy, the child is hoping for one more day. "I'm not considered a life yet, but if I make it to tomorrow, I will be! Woo-hoo!"