What to do and say:
(1) Summarize the case:
(2) Use science (embryology) to answer the question, “What is the unborn? Is it human?”
See Question 1.
(3) Use philosophy to make the case for equal rights for all people.
“There is no morally significant difference between the embryo that you once were and the adult that you are today that would justify killing you at that early stage of development. Differences in size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency are not relevant such that we can say that you had no rights as an embryo but you do have rights today.” —Stephen Schwartz
But they are so small! True. Embryos are smaller than toddlers, who are smaller than teenagers. The principle of equal rights among all human beings means size is not relevant. Rights do not increase with size. In general, men are larger than women. Does this mean they should have more rights?
But they are in the womb! True. But where you are does not determine what you are. Location is not relevant to the concept of equal rights. You are not less human in your house than on the sidewalk. Nothing happens spiritually or philosophically to a baby simply by moving through the birth canal.
But they are not self-aware! True. Toddlers are less cognitively developed than teenagers. People in surgery are less aware than when awake. But their human rights do not rise and fall with their degree of awareness. Is it morally justifiable to cut their throat while they are in surgery, or is their level of awareness not relevant to their rights?
But they are still dependent! True. All babies, young children, even teenagers are dependent on others. The old and the sick are dependent. Those who are dependent on insulin do not lose their right to life. God says that dependent people are to be cared for, not killed.