I haven't re-read it.
saw your post re: abortions. Mr, you need to shift your thinking a bit.. I won't waste time on this for very long, but just because some flesh is being grown in the form to appear as if it is one of us does not mean there is a life inside of it. It is being constructed, built, "grown" yes, However it does not make itself. There is no identity, no experience, no ability. It is a growth from a person, within a person. It is not a person. There will never be a just argument to illegalise all abortion. The "grey area", if there is to be any argument, is limited to at what point do we consider the continued growth to be granted rights within our society as an entity of its self. The reason we, "the left" allow there to be any argument at all, is because of this grey area. We are open to considering that yes, if the growth might survive on its own, were it not being produced within a womb, and there is a world outside to care for it as-needed, then maybe we 'allow' there to be some "laws" if you on the right so insist it to be written down as such, of a specific abortion term, timeframe limit. In reality, a newborn baby human is no more than a baby bird in a nest. As a species, our babies even after full gestation, birth at 9 months, aren't capable of possessing any inherent value -unless say, as food for a predator or insect, funghi etcetera. So, to say that there even is an argument over whether abortions should be legal is an utter joke. A punch in the face of reality. We might grant you, that because of our society, and how yes really good we have it, we could provide for everyone else's unwanted oopsie-babies born, that maybe if _at least_ the growth, were it removed after say eight months, it might be allowed to be nurtured, babied, thus it could grow and become an individual, have a chance. But everything else is off the table. Any earlier, it is only an unconscious, devoid of thinking, unaware, mushy growth -it'll kick, sure, move around in a belly, yes sir, like a frog's leg will after death when prodded, or a roach elbow that's been sitting for weeks twitching. It's not even equivalent to those things, because it hasn't yet had life, so it cannot possibly be a life.
Go get a Lobster, for supper, look into the eyes of it, reach out towards it and watch it react. Then steam it, open it and begin dissecting. Flip back the carapace, the body, go find the brain sack, just behind the eyes. There's a little bag, full of water, with some jumbles of string -those are nerves. It sees you, it reacts by preprogrammed instinct -instincts of which we are born with very, very few. It survives throughout its life with the same instincts woven into the patterns which make up Lobster. It has nowhere to store family memories, experiences don't teach it much -other than some of the nerves may be linked to other nerves based on certain patterns recognised by signals the Lobster's senses trigger. Precisely because we are so different from a creature "born" from birth so advanced, with nearly all of its instincts intact, that you must understand how a fetus is a fetus. It has no instincts. It knows, barely, to cough out fluids upon exposure to a new atmosphere, after 9 months, then inhale -these are still only nerves, muscles, organs being triggered by signals from the senses. Now it has made the most major transition it might ever, and it is "alive". Worthless, helpless, but by some happenstance occurrence, perhaps there is a person it came out of, some One, to begin interacting with it. Like rubber bands, its nerves react to all of the signalled senses, as it develops those nerve endings into a mushy organ we call the brain.. suddenly there are records being kept, for the future It to react on, learn from, And on it learns -hopefully. Let us correct this preconceived misconception that conception is life. Life is not so much the miracle, what We do while we Live is.