Philosophers agree that a basic difference between humans and other animals is that we experience time and space much differently. Animals live in the here and now, with no conceptual understanding that there is a future and past; nor any concept that places exist other than their present environment. Being human, on the other hand, means having a mind that knows reality extends beyond our present sensual experience of the here and now.

So a human is able to know he or she is a human being within a human lifecycle.

In other words, we know Person A is a human being currently experiencing her adolescent stage; Person B is a human being presently experiencing his elderly stage, etc. It’s baffling, then, that so many “pro-choice” advocates argue on the basis of the embryo’s size, shape, and maturity – when human intelligence enables us to know the embryo, like all of us, is an entire lifecycle, temporarily experiencing his or her embryonic stage, as we all did.

It obviously follows that killing a human being in this stage doesn’t “just” kill an embryo, but rather a human being and every stage of his or her lifecycle.

It’s sad but hard to deny: “Pro-choicers” who make these arguments think like animals.