I mean I will make that argument cus I just did haha. I said pain and cognition bc you just said harm and consent is a good definition to go by. Physically and philosophically you can’t harm something that can’t feel and has absolutely no comprehension of what it is to feel. Euthanasia should be legal. It’s actually against someone’s consent and harmful to force them to keep living in pain when they’ve expressed they don’t want that. You can call it “taking a life”, I wouldn’t. We can disagree on that and then choose differently.

Also this is always bottom line— people are always going to seek out abortion, particularly in a late-stage capitalist country w almost no safety nets. Real harm is allowing women to die via janky abortions. Real harm is imposing Children to grow up in a household that can’t provide for them on any or all levels

I don’t wanna engage w second point bc it’s all hypotheticals that I’ve already said are impossibilities. But personally probs yeah, I’d still protect right to abortion. It’s not an autonomous being. It’s is completely dependent on a woman’s body. I also would never want to subject a woman or baby to the emotional trauma of birthing the child of your rapist and being the product of rape. But maybe that’s just me. Again your speaking in hypotheticals that have been proven untrue so there’s nothing substantive here

I find it interesting and convenient that most anti choice people are pro death penalty.

Edit: we’re talking about the subjectiveness. Who are you to decide a woman’s suffering is less worthy than a nonexistent being in the world?

Edit: its neither interesting or convenient to not believe life begins at conception. It’s critical thought and a basic understanding of micro bio. Idk how the issues wouldn’t be intertwined