>>13451263Well you are saying that killing those skin cells is not murder. And removing a skin cell does not kill it. You can take a skin cell, and put it in a petri dish, and let it live in there. But then you could also kill it.
So why is killing a single stem cell murder?
At what point is it murder to kill a clump of human cells?
This is the essence of the debate on whether abortion is murder.
Religious people (or rather, most western religious people) think a cell or clump of cells gets a soul at conception. Or at some point after conception. And that killing a clump of cells with a soul is murder. But killing a clump of cells with no soul is not murder.
Areligious people don't necessarily believe in souls. And from my experience, they tend to think that killing a clump of cells is not murder, unless that clump of cells has an adequately formed and sufficiently complex nervous system. What exactly is that threshold? I don't know. I don't think it's well defined.
So you have several categories. Religious and non-religious. Their opinions on souls. Their religious opinions on abortion. Their opinions on what qualifies as murder. Probably several other dichotomies I am forgetting.
I've already proposed a potential solution for avoiding the pro-life/pro-choice problem. Put money into research for artificial wombs. Then we can satisfy the "my body, my choice" crowd, and the "life starts at conception" crowd.
Unfortunately we can't satisfy the "dont have sex if you dont want a baby" crowd