Fraggle, I really want to help you out. But you need to work with me and actually read what I post. The least objectionable post you have made states: "saving a fetus will surly result in the death of an already born person." You imply that I made this or a similar statement. Of course that statement by you is either a lie or an intentional misrepresentation. I am going to illustrate the difference in your lie and my statements. In my statement the time frame allows that a born baby/child/adult and a zygote/embryo/fetus are already dying. In such a case the "death" is not because of the saving of a fetus. Instead the baby dies because of the action that precedes the saving of the fetus, the choice to save the fetus. The baby didn't die because you saved the fetus, it died because you choose to save the fetus instead of the baby. So the death is not a result of saving the fetus but because earlier, you chose to save the fetus and let the baby die. It is your choice that kills the baby. The b/c/a and z/e/f are at a point in the time line of their life where they are already dying. The only way either can live is by being saved. That is where they are on the timeline of life. So your claim that saving the fetus "results in" the death of a baby is clearly wrong. What "results in" the death of the baby is the choice to let it die instead of saving it. A person could have chosen to save the baby. On a timeline the "choice" to save the fetus or the baby occurs before the death of either one. So the two are dying and the next thing that occurs in a timeline is a choice to save one or the other and the next thing that occurs is that one or the other dies. It is the choice of whom to save that determines who will live not the fact that death will occur.