Taken from the other thread, I rather take this here.

Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
That points out the real problem. It is either black or white with this issue, but people are drawn to middle ground -even if it doesn't make much sense.

Political reality suggests that if you find a "middle ground" less people will complain, but it says nothing about the moral reality.

So I do understand where you are coming from. I just 100% disagree. I also understand the greay area people. My disagreement lies within the 1%-99% area.

Read that article that I had posted earlier, I think that it sums up the argument nicely.
Tuff, abortion is very far from black and white. It goes into the question of "what is a Human?", "what is I?" and "what is life?" and while seemingly easy to see at first glance, it will incredibly complicated If I cut off someones head, but keep the body alive, did I commit murder? Your instinct say yes, but how can you define the poor person as dead without also defining a embryo without a nerve system as dead?

As you can see, you cannot even judge an adult and a embryo on the same scale for starters.

Using potential for life isn't gonna work either as then you'll need to define what potential for life that's acceptable and what's not, for example what to do with a foestus that in thid month is found to most certain be dead within a week the 5:th month, 7:th month, at birth, or a few years after? When are the potential for life low enough to be deemed dead in practice?

And besides, none of the countries that are forbidding abortion are actually granting the same rights as for a newborn or older person and thus in practice not considering an embryo to be fully "human". Otherwise, the question if it was a miscariage or negligent homicide would be pretty common.