>Yet you can't point out the difference. The purpose of a uterus is not the same as other organs. The purpose of your regular organs is to support your body. T

>Yet you can't point out the difference. The purpose of a uterus is not the same as other organs. The purpose of your regular organs is to support your body. The purpose of a uterus is to support the fetus. If a woman didn't bear children she wouldn't have a uterus. >And so we should pretend that flat earth, anti-vax, and life from conception are all valid worldviews that deserve respect? I don't think you need to consider a view valid to show the person (not the view) making it respect. >This has everything to do with religion, because this particular fallacy was invented by one particular religion. Notably, you still hadn't shown a single non-religious argument; instead you're now looping repeating something that's already been shown to be irrelevant ("good biological evidence"). You are the one repeating. Nobody is talking about religion except for you. So long as you can't stop bring up religion there is no point in continuing. >Sure, but they _could_. While in case of fetuses and cadavers we can easily prove this is not the case. A toddler does not have a fully formed brain. The brain does not fully form until the person is in their 20s. Fetuses have brain waves. Some of the brain waves look similar to brain waves during dreams. That is not to say the fetus is in fact dreaming, but it _could_ be.